Moose's crop is nearly identical to my two final choices. I went back
and forth on it for some time. I think both work. I ended up selecting
the one shown because it was more true to the original vision/intent.
By cropping tighter, it loses the "sound" of the flowing water to the
left. The original gives the auditory system something to do. The
cropped version so deemphasized the flowing water that the scene
became silent except for the sound of the crickets.
The trees and their reflections are really about the most interesting
aspect of this photograph, but I actually have another picture of
those that is very specific to that. I didn't want to duplicate the
same shot with a too tight crop. Those are two entirely different
pictures.
AS to the bright white surround on the Zone-10 images. That is the
style for the site which was developed specifically for consistency
and the way it works with any picture, regardless of brightness. If I
have an overly black image, there is no border and the image just
disappears into the background in some creepy freakshow kinda way.
(floating heads) But the white border also does something else which
is critical for B&W photographs. It helps define the brightness range
or boundary of the image itself. Without this anchoring
point-of-reference, the image can appear too light, too dark, too
muddy or too edgy. This is why most B&W pictures NEED a border. As B&W
is "abstract" by its very nature, you have to define how the image is
to be visually interpreted.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|