Is a foreground object necessary in landscape images?
Mar 27, 2023 09:49:58 #
gvarner
Loc: Central Oregon Coast
Without a strong foreground subject then minimize the foreground, allow more sky. The tree would have to be much closer to be effective. Cropping in from the left and up from the bottom might help.
Mar 27, 2023 10:29:29 #
StanMac
Loc: Tennessee
I don’t know if it’s a best practices “rule” or not, but landscape images have more appeal to me if there is some foreground interest to add scale or context to the subject.
Stan
Stan
Mar 27, 2023 11:19:37 #
To have or not have a foreground object depends on the photo. Here, the near-ground palm tree is sufficient; adding a foreground object would weaken its impact. A landscape of, say, a beach sunset might be made better with a seagull or crab on the foreground sand, or the silhouette of a couple holding hands, or something.
Nice shot, very nice. This is a good example of a landscape needing no foreground object.
Nice shot, very nice. This is a good example of a landscape needing no foreground object.
Mar 27, 2023 12:02:19 #
Mar 27, 2023 12:55:11 #
fantom wrote:
HUH???
Cany143 gave you a condensed Master’s course in composition and the mental processes that could/should occur while planning the shot.
Mar 27, 2023 14:23:25 #
It all depends. Experimentation is best. Practice is a good way to go to learn composition.
jack
jack
Mar 27, 2023 14:26:13 #
daldds wrote:
I was taught that some type of object is usually n... (show quote)
Nothing needed for me, a beautiful composition.
The horizon caught my eye immediately and is off a little per the geometry setting (auto) in camera raw.
Mar 27, 2023 15:58:20 #
My FWIW opinion;
You do not 'always' need a foreground 'subject/object',
The shot is good as is,
In some instances a familiar object is helpful to show the scale of the scene,
you should find some photographers to play golf with.
You do not 'always' need a foreground 'subject/object',
The shot is good as is,
In some instances a familiar object is helpful to show the scale of the scene,
you should find some photographers to play golf with.
Mar 27, 2023 22:59:53 #
BigRed01
Loc: Corona de Tucson, AZ
Nigel Danson, Landscape Photographer, post an excellent presentation on this yesterday, on YouTube, called...
"Don't Make This Composition Mistake" .
Of course as in this photo on a golf course or a walk in the marsh you can't always change your position for composition!
"Don't Make This Composition Mistake" .
Of course as in this photo on a golf course or a walk in the marsh you can't always change your position for composition!
Mar 28, 2023 04:11:24 #
I like the shot because of the clouds. The clouds make the shot for me.
Mar 28, 2023 08:04:00 #
Mar 28, 2023 10:41:32 #
Reuss Griffiths
Loc: Ravenna, Ohio
daldds wrote:
I was taught that some type of object is usually n... (show quote)
It's an interesting image with good composition (rule of 3rds) and it has interesting but rather common features, i.e., a palm tree, a stand of trees in mid-distance, an attractive sunny, clouded sky, but there's nothing here that stands out. If you were walking by a series of pictures on a wall, there's nothing here that would capture your attention to make you want to stop and look some more. If the image doesn't capture your eye with something provocative then further engagement is unlikely. A similar object in the foreground is not going to change that. Sorry for being so negative about a generally very pleasant image.
Mar 28, 2023 13:46:11 #
Although my thoughts are not worth any more than all of the other opinions here, I think your subject is that of "emotion". A solitary tree, separated from the large copse of trees. To have it closer you would lose the feeling of the vastness of the marsh and distance. It could be seen as isolation. Or seclusion. Or segregation. Or independence. Or strength. Or free thinking. Or intolerant. All depends on your perspective.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.