Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Here’s the original, Coz, I think at full resolution. (Wouldn’t take the dng file)

Attached file:
(Download)


(Download)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Dave, the first download link that says "attached file" is the 13 mb dng. It just doesn't show a thumbnail on UHH (same for raw, pdf, Word docs etc).

Toleman

The original to me me shows an expanse of nothing much so I would crop right in to the main subject.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Personally I like the full frame. The scene is divided into three sections, foreground, distance, and dark sky. The hill on the right and the tree on the left help to provide a frame. I prefer the water being slightly off-center.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

I strongly prefer the original over the various cropped and stretched versions.

Mike

L-Fox

Flip a coin...like them both, lean a bit to the uncropped.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

I was going to comment, but Linda and Paul beat me to what I would have said.

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

I like them both but prefer the original to the cropped version. I just think it's a better balanced composition.

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

Either done works for me Dave. I don't get a strong feeling for one over the other.
Having said that I like JD's version the best with the pano look to it. Reducing the sky and removing the tree to your left you get this more intimate feel for the water.

edrobinsonjr Loc: Boise, Idaho

I think you have a good shot here. I just cropped a bit off of the bottom and added a bit of shadow.

Ed

(Download)

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

To:
RG,
Linda,
JD,
Charlie,
Loren,
Paul,
Jack,
Toleman,
Mike,
Dwight,
John,
Jim, and
Ed ;


I thank you all, sincerely, for your comments and suggestions. I have read...and re-read.. and considered... and re-considered each of your posted comments and suggestions. I am left with having to admit to having posted my two versions because, as you likely guessed, I liked them both and, lacking the objectivity to choose one o’er the other, had hoped that the objectivity of other eyes would combine in a majority opinion to relieve my quandary!

No such luck!

My conclusion is that your responses, suggestions, and illustrated ideas will serve as a basis for a substantive discussion in one of my classes dealing with composition - when such can resume with relative safety after the second ....and third (?) “wave” of Covid-19 has finally passed through. Cogent and notably reasonable suggestions all. And I must admit, Coz and JD, that I had not considered a vertical stretch! A novel and laudable idea,I must say!
I will be preparing examples illustrating each of the different suggestions to use in class (and a link to the discussion will be provided) so I do, indeed, thank you all for your substantive contributions!

With many thanks and best regards to you all,

Dave

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

I hope that the day when you can hold such discussions in your classes will not be too far into the future.

Mike

R.G. Loc: Scotland

A bit late coming back with this - please forgive.

One of the problems with flat terrain is that you can find yourself limited in your viewpoints, especially where elevation is concerned. As a consequence you can find yourself using a lower viewpoint than would be ideal. One possible workaround is to give the image a vertical stretch which, while not being perfect, does come close to giving you the equivalent of a more elevated perspective. That in turn gives a better view of the mid and far fields, and that will work regardless of how wide the crop is, so I did one each for a wide crop and a closer crop (since you've decided that both have their merits).

One of the purposes of a closer crop is to bring the open water into more prominence. Using a higher perspective does that, so perhaps with the vertical stretch it doesn't need quite so much cropping, which in turn will give you the best of both worlds. Even with the original DNG I found that the Transform tool didn't do quite as much stretching as I expected - probably because I'm used to the 24MP files that my D5200 gives me. As well as a vertical stretch I gave it some vertical tilt to widen the far field, which will add to the simulated shift in perspective.
.

Wide crop.

(Download)

Tighter crop.

(Download)

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Hi,Coz,
Your comparative images effectively make your point, and impress me that your approach has definite merit! It’s one I had not previously thought of.
Many thanks!

User ID

Sure ... just reset the date and time in the camera back to that day and return to the same spot. The same clouds and light will greet you. Try it. You got anything else on your plate these days ?

As to the crop: Starting with the tighter version, bring in the left and right margins even more. Cut away 2/3 of the nearer/larger clump of trees on the left. Cut away 1/2 of the clump on the right. Bring up the bottom margin much closer to the water.

Now notice the two almost independent sky areas, one gray and grey, the other blue and white. Notice the outline shape of each sky area and the collection of “lumpy rectangles” stacked within each area. See what’s happening ? The surreal objects in the upper half of the image floating above above the very naturalistic scene in the lower half ?