Sprinkles on Corcoran's Pond: Corcoran's Pond 03215 Tokina 11-16 Crop out the bottom underwater part ??

steve L Loc: Waterville Valley, New Hampshire

Corcoran's Pond 03215

Tokina 11-16

Crop out the bottom underwater part ??

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

I think it adds depth and balances the sky a bit. You might think of cropping both top and bottom, if you want to crop at all.

repleo Loc: Boston

Maybe.
The underwater part doesn't bother me, but I would experiment with trying to get the far shore line off the middle of the frame by cropping either the underwater or some of the sky. While you are at it, crop or clone out the little bit of rock sticking out on the right hand side.
Nice place.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

steve L wrote:

.....Crop out the bottom underwater part ??

No.

steve L Loc: Waterville Valley, New Hampshire

repleo wrote:

Maybe.
The underwater part doesn't bother me, but I would experiment with trying to get the far shore line off the middle of the frame by cropping either the underwater or some of the sky. While you are at it, crop or clone out the little bit of rock sticking out on the right hand side.
Nice place.

Thanks....i’ll Work on it and repost !

Mr. B Loc: eastern Connecticut

I just noticed that if I scrolled your photo up and down on my computer screen it looked much better with about two thirds of the sky missing. I found then that my eye was drawn first to the near-side water and then back to the hills and sky. Try it on your screen before you crop it.

fergmark Loc: norwalk connecticut

If I were to crop I would probably crop out some of the sky, as Mr. B also thought. I like it as a 5x7 crop. I also think it works nicely in b/w.

Nightski

I think cropping two thirds of the sky would help. Also the white balance seems to be off and it seems a bit over-saturated. I would click on a cloud with the white balance dropper to correct the color and back off on the saturation slider.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

steve L wrote:

Corcoran's Pond 03215

Tokina 11-16

Crop out the bottom underwater part ??

When you were taking this shot, what were you thinking? Why did you take it? What was your focal point? Answering these questions will help you decide what to crop and what to leave. Is the sky spectacular in some way, does it add to the image? If not, remove it in some way. Oftentimes, with this type of shot, the foreground is what is interesting. I use LR and for this shot I would use a graduated filter with clarity and plus exposure on the water to bring up what is in the water.

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

I think the underwater foliage creates additional interest and value. I as others would reduce 1/3 or more of the sky. No one mentioned and interested if others see the mid section, land mass, over saturated. This area on my computer this area looks plugged with unrealistic fully saturated color. Does anyone else feel the same on this area?
Jim

fergmark Loc: norwalk connecticut

Jim-Pops wrote:

I think the underwater foliage creates additional interest and value. I as others would reduce 1/3 or more of the sky. No one mentioned and interested if others see the mid section, land mass, over saturated. This area on my computer this area looks plugged with unrealistic fully saturated color. Does anyone else feel the same on this area?
Jim

I would describe it as the darks are blown.

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

I usually start with 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 sky, land, water, but of course like all "rules" in photography, they are only starting points. I don't believe the foreground adds anything to the photo and IMHO is distracting. I would play with the sky a bit to see if it could be made more dramatic.

SStei

I like the oversaturated blues and greens.I think that's just a matter of taste.