Stormy Tree

alexisonfire · 16 Apr 2009 at 18:41

Couple from today..

Derek W · 16 Apr 2009 at 18:56

Not too sure about the black and white for those images. the sky looks pixely

MikeHunt79 · 16 Apr 2009 at 19:03

Nice shots, it does look like the tree is glowing a little, I'm guessing this could be because it's HDR?

V-Spec · 16 Apr 2009 at 20:23

Very moody, I think theres quite a bit of artifacting in the sky though. Prefer the bottom one as its got more room to breath

Irish_Tom · 16 Apr 2009 at 23:40

Really like the top one, probably because it doesn't have space around it.

The claustrophobic nature of it adds to the eeriness/uneasiness of it.

Panzer

Tooks · 16 Apr 2009 at 23:43

Panzerbjorn said:
Really like the top one, probably because it doesn't have space around it.

The claustrophobic nature of it adds to the eeriness/uneasiness of it.

Panzer

I was about to say similar!!

I quite like the grainy texture of it too, goes with the menacing feel.

I like it!

Jotun · 16 Apr 2009 at 23:54

Both nice shots. I prefer the 1st one, although both look like there is a bit of haloing around the tree.

D.P. · 17 Apr 2009 at 07:17

Much prefer bottom one because the sky adds to the dramatic feel rather than seeming to be a distracting background. But both images are way over processed resulting in artifacts. The sky is grainy probably due to too aggressive levels, seems like a USM induced noise grain in general and halo around tree. In general it is oversharpended for a black and white photo. If the image was origionally soft then USm wont help, you need better technique or better glass.

The shot has a lot of potential, although it is a well covered topic.
TIm

Tooks · 17 Apr 2009 at 09:15

I think shots like this one will always polarise opinion depending on whether you view it as a technical exercise, or a piece of art.

Yes, there is a lot 'technically' wrong with it, but somehow it still ends up being a very nice picture.

Similarly, not all technically perfect pictures are great pictures!

Interestingly, I was in a lot of art galleries/studios the week before last, and I noticed more mounted photos for sale where the photographer had obviously gone for something a bit different (and in some cases crazy stuff!) in the processing, either deliberately or to make a photo more saleable.

Technically, a lot of them were very average, but they were all interesting photographs to look at and would have looked great on a wall. One gallery owner summed it up by saying that lots of people with DSLR's could take the perfect landscape/wildlife picture, but probably lacked the creative side and for that reason the more arty stuff was selling quite well.