Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

For landscape photographers, light is so important to what we do. My favorite is morning light. The afternoon light provides similar light but often with a wind element. Morning light is calm and serene. It is almost a religious experience in some instances, like Monument Valley. This image of the Golden Gate Bridge was taken a little over a year ago, on May 11, 2015. The April and May months provide fine weather conditions. In a few weeks, fog will dominate the bridge and the bay area in the mornings and it will remain in such a pattern until the fall. While the fog can add drama, it will mute the colors and soften the effect. I am not complaining but when it rolls in, it can shroud the bridge and hide its wonderful shape and color. If it is just at the bridge, it is wonderful. If it shrouds the entire area, it is not so good.

To get this shot, I had to be on the road at 3:30 AM and be on site at 5:00 AM. That’s an hour before sunrise. It is nearly completely dark when I arrive. If you are lucky, you are the only one there. So you are setting up in the dark and using live view to focus and frame. The shot was taken at ISO 64, you want a low ISO to reduce noise, with a Nikon D810, with a 16-35 f/4.0 at 20 mm for 20 seconds. There are some clouds but really not enough IMO.

I like the composition, I am using the path (foreground), leading you to the bridge (mid ground) to the brightest part of the image on the other side of the bridge (background). In essence, your eyes are lead across the entire frame. There is good separation among the elements, including the trees and building. The image is soft and the waters slightly blurred as it is a long exposure. No filters were used. Shortly after sunrise, the lights go off on the bridge and the light is lost. Time for other shots….but I will be back and often.

Golden Date Bridge

(Download)

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

I really like the composition and the light reflecting off of the cement. Beautifully done with the path leading us in and the reflection in the bay of the bridge and buildings. Wonderful shot, thank you for sharing and explaining!

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Thanks!

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I think I might have composed it with the rock nearer the bottom right hand corner. The farther into the frame the rock is placed, the more it competes with the main subject - the bridge. As it is, the bridge isn't very big in the frame and there's a danger that the shot will be seen as a picture of the foreground elements with a bridge in the background. I think it's on the limit as far as the bridge/foreground balance goes. But I commend the obvious thoughtfulness that the shot is evidence of, and the result is beautiful and engaging.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Having lived in the San Francisco Bay area for a decade (1970's), it was interesting to read R.G.'s comment, "there's a danger that the shot will be seen as a picture of the foreground elements with a bridge in the background..."

It's hard to imagine the Golden Gate Bridge ever taking second chair to any other element in a photo, being so well known, recognized and dominant on the landscape.

Love the colors, the light, the curve of the bridge, and the wisp of fog touching the closer tower.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Thanks, I went to USF in the 70ies ...

fosterbender

Looks as if you found the path and the rock more interesting than the bridge?

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

It is interesting to read a critique of a photograph written by the photographer. I understand what your intent was for the way you composed the image. However, I find that your leading lines dominate, and even overpower, your composition. My eye is not led up to the bridge and across to what you describe as the brightest part of the picture. My eye is attracted to the brightest, most vivid, parts of the picture; the reflections off the walk immediately in front of me and the bright lights on the abutment in the upper left. I'm afraid my attention is drawn by the bright, vivid and sharp upper left section of the picture and never gets to the sunrise except as an after thought. My inclination would have been to find a viewpoint where the beautiful parts of the bridge would have dominated the composition.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Yes, the standard shot is the bridge and just the bridge. The path has a very nice texture and pattern that leads you to the bridge. The rock is a nice nachor point and adds scale to the image. It is a wonderful leading line or path. I look for those lines where ever I am. It is part of good composition. Should I have more bridge and less path. I have those images as well. In 2014 the California Coastal Commission during its annual photography contest recognized a pylon with the Bridge in the background as a winner. The pylon was quite weathered as you can tell by this image of the chain that fronts the bridge.

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

I find the composition too lopsided Mark and the rock is not strong enough to offset it. I am stuck on the left side because of the path and structure. It is a well done photograph no question but lacks any real impact for me.

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

This second image by far is the best of the two. I love the chain for sure. As a leading line it works very well. What makes this different from the first is the structure at the end of the leading line is far enough away that the eye can move right into the rest of the frame. This would be an interesting take for your light shot.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Okay, I understand but not about the lopsided. BTW, shooting that bridge or any bridge from that perspective with an ultra wide angle lens is problematic. The ultra wide tends to distort anything not shot perfectly level. Tilted Bridge towers are the result of not shooting level. They never work and get tossed. For this shot, I am on my knees, in the dark making every effort at being level, checking all aspects of the frame, some times moving an inch here or there for separation and avoiding distortion at all costs.

Thank you for your comment and interest.

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

I am sorry I meant nothing at all about distortion Mark. By lopsided I meant unbalanced, guess I should have used that word, my mistake. It is too left side heavy for me and with all elements close holding my attention......not releasing my eye to move to the rest of the frame. You did well containing distortion.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

All good...

fosterbender

Not quite mate. The second photo more than the first shows it to be over processed. The amount of work put into both images once downloaded would mean whatever natural light you had to work with was just overpowered by all the enhancements added by software.
As a landscaper myself I came across this work whilst deciding if this was a site I could enjoy http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-389453-1.html
I would say a good study of this work and its proper use of natural light will help in your next attempt