Morning Fog: Is this effective?

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Is this effective?

Oregon Coast - October

(Download)

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Interesting in being able to capture several shades of gray in one shot. Up here in Minnesota I like to claim we can enjoy all shades of gray, from tinged rosy to tinged violet. First opportunity I'll try to grab an example.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

mcveed wrote:

Is this effective?

It's a good idea, but to my eye there's an excess of the misty stuff. If you were to crop by taking in the bottom left corner it would give more prominence to the hillside, hopefully giving a more balanced look.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Since this is FYC I'm going to post the crops I find more appealing, rather than just say :)

I'm with R.G. regarding one possibility. I know you have beach and water at the bottom, but not being able to see more than a teensy bit is somewhat uncomfortable because now the trees are kind of floating.

I also like an unbalanced panorama for a bit of drama, along with the trees' position making more "sense" (to me):

(Download)

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Linda From Maine wrote:

.....I also like an unbalanced panorama for a bit of drama:

I was envisaging something between #1 and #2.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

R.G. wrote:

I was envisaging something between #1 and #2.

After reading your comments, and Linda's, I had another look at it. I think there was too much sky in the original and I agree that the hill needs more real estate. But I really didn't want to abandon the bit of beach (that's what makes it the Oregon Coast) and the three seagulls. So here is my second version. There may be more.

(Download)

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

mcveed wrote:

After reading your comments, and Linda's, I had another look at it. I think there was too much sky in the original and I agree that the hill needs more real estate. But I really didn't want to abandon the bit of beach (that's what makes it the Oregon Coast) and the three seagulls. So here is my second version. There may be more.

Had you not described it mcveed, I would not have zoomed in to see the 4 seagulls and beach. So I guess my answer is no.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Frank2013 wrote:

Had you not described it mcveed, I would not have zoomed in to see the 4 seagulls and beach. So I guess my answer is no.

Thanks for looking, Frank. Did you really have to zoom in on the download to see the beach at the bottom?

Joanna27 Loc: Lakewood Ca

mcveed wrote:

Thanks for looking, Frank. Did you really have to zoom in on the download to see the beach at the bottom?

I am using my IPad, so my screen is small (my problem) but I don't see the seagulls. I can see something in the lower left but it didn't know it was the beach.
I love the misty trees. For me that is the best part of the image.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

mcveed wrote:

Is this effective?

Hi, Don,
Off all the versions, I prefer Linda's first one. Personally, I'd not worry about keeping the beach and those three gulls; the immature one's awkward expression and the scruffy plumage on the middle one are just unnecessarily distractive. Caught my attention at first glance!

Dave

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

mcveed wrote:

...But I really didn't want to abandon the bit of beach (that's what makes it the Oregon Coast) and the three seagulls. So here is my second version. There may be more.

I can't see the seagulls without download and zoom in.

Your comment about not wanting to abandon the bit of beach resonates with me. People often want me to crop my big, cloudless blue skies, but that is one thing about the area where I've been living for 13 years that I still very much love.

This could be one of those images that mean much more to the photographer than the casual viewer because of your connection to the time, place and memories. I have learned to be grateful that I'm able to experience the beauty and joy, and if someone else likes the shot, too, that's just dessert :)

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Joanna27 wrote:

I am using my IPad, so my screen is small (my problem) but I don't see the seagulls. I can see something in the lower left but it didn't know it was the beach.
I love the misty trees. For me that is the best part of the image.

Thanks Joanna. Then you will probably like this version better. It would seem to be what most people want to see out of this image. It may be a better composition but it doesn't convey a very accurate sense of the place.

(Download)

Joanna27 Loc: Lakewood Ca

mcveed wrote:

Thanks Joanna. Then you will probably like this version better. It would seem to be what most people want to see out of this image. It may be a better composition but it doesn't convey a very accurate sense of the place.

Yes I do like it better but then I wasn't there. I know nothing about the the place other than what i see. Being must have been a bit moody and a lot awesome.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

mcveed wrote:

Thanks for looking, Frank. Did you really have to zoom in on the download to see the beach at the bottom?

Truth be told Don I did not notice anything at the bottom on first download as I was focused on the trees. Then after your description I glanced and thought beach, sea gulls,? looked like a sand trap on a golf hole at first.then I zoomed in and saw the beach, 3 gulls and then the single gull to the right. Might I suggest some very minimal isolated fog removal for the lower portion of the frame.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Joanna27 wrote:

Yes I do like it better but then I wasn't there. I know nothing about the the place other than what i see. Being must have been a bit moody and a lot awesome.

Yes it was both. The light was magical just after the sun came up. Depending on which way the wind was blowing the fog and which way you were facing the light was as you see it in the pictures I have posted or like this:

(Download)