* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #870 / Revived #090 on 2024 12 18 *

I like it because it looks fairly natural but as I said, the sharpness can be adjusted very finely to suit by painting on a layer mask with the shade of grey to give the level of sharpness that looks good to whoever is editing the photo.

C&C is about how an image works or does not work and to what extent for individuals. It is slso about how an image that works to some extent, as in MikePDX's image, can be made to work even better. Your thoughts, like everyone else's, are not definitive and one's that everyone must agree with. As Mike stated, he created the image according to his personal preferences and so everyone then gets to like or dislike it or any parts of it according to their personal preferences. The sooner you accept that the more at peace you will be with people who do not agree with all your opinions.

I understand the conversation here but...

You both seem to be treating the image as an absolute and therefore the levels of blur/sharpening are also absolute and are seen as absolute. And so by adjusting their levels you cater for preference.

But this misunderstands the nature of an image and is little more than photographers trying to define and quantify the image by their own technical understanding and metrics.

But this is a highly abstracted image. It relies on memory to recognise the subject and as such personal memory and expectation play a large part in in determining what and how you see this. Further to this, and in exactly the same way you both try to define the image by the level of sharpening/blur, the viewer tries to define/attach a meaning to the way the image is abstracted simply because we need an exact answer. It is not the exact level of sharpening/blur that controls this process but our own memories and how far we find the level of abstraction believable and how easily we can attribute an absolute meaning to the way the image is abstracted. And so we "see through" the abstraction by adding that recognition, it is not and does not need to be in the image, it needs to stay in the viewers imagination. By thinking and trying to add an "exact level of blur that defines" you try to make the image absolute, make the image fit your individual imaginations. And by doing so you make it relevant to one preference rather than understanding that it's the ambiguity that allows the many different interpretations.

It's not the image that's absolute but the viewpoint, the image itself is quite plastic.

I'm sorry, but I haven't actually taken any photos this week except a reference photo of the wiring on the extractor fan when I replaced it, which looks a little like a roundabout and as a ticket in to this discussion is a little thin, but...

Personally, I find the blur a little too much and abstracts past real believably. Though the image should work really well smaller on a smart phone, it should go down a storm. The colours are great, but the balance needs a little off the left which gives a coherent group, and I would brighten/reduce contrast of the background to bring the horses forward (I include the foreground as well as it is "background tho the centre of the image). Please accept a humble, and subtle edit on the promise that I'll post another image in this series of threads as soon as I take one.

Best viewed as the thumbnail below:

P.S. Broadband borken, replies will be sporadic...

Andrew's reply is very interesting, and his definition of the viewer's response to an abstract image is consistent with my own. I would only comment that, as a trained engineer, my first response to any image tends to be a literal one. That is something that I've been trying to overcome in my journey down the abstract rabbit hole. And I might add it's quite a challenge. 😄

While I think a good job was done on recovering the detail in the sky, I still firmly prefer the original.
The more bleached out look, is to me more fitting for this classically beautiful location.
It is more timeless, and less like an HDR-inspired promo photo for a holiday retreat on booking.com.

The house is the real main character here. Boy and dog are extras: they are the temporary pawns on the board with the house as undisputed queen.

Very very VERY interesting thoughts and discussions on this image.
There is little I can add, and definitely zero on any technical aspects.
What I can add, is a gut feeling.
However much is real, fake, abstracted, processed or manipulated in this image: it works.
I am transfixed by the thought of this group of horses rushing past me, through some marshland in the Camargues or somewhere similar.
I am totally in.

A still life elevated by what is not really there.
The shadows falling at an angle to complement the diagonals is what makes this an exercize in geometry.

A composition is deep blue and golden orange.
What could possibly be not to like then here?

Well, I like the diagonal formed by the bottom of the row of exhibition cabinets.
But I am not sure about the half object that is half visible and half obscured in the second box.
If you had shown only two boxes, I would definitely consider cloning out that second object (although I almost never clone).
But the fact that you also show the third box and that it is seemingly empty, helps me cope.
It's like a story now, of objects slowly fading in oblivion through space and time.

It's almost a shame because his editing skills were good. He just always seemed to take it too far - often beyond what might be plausible...

Agreed, the original is far more evocative, has far more of that "Sally Mann" feel about it.

Thank you Chris. Yes, lots of memories and history since my grandparents built this house in 1908. It was falling down when I got it 9 years ago, and it has been a labor of love and and $ and work since then, but worth it. The grandson hauling the tree claims he wants to live there when he's grown.

Well, of all the Christmases I've had there in my long lifetime, there was only one where we had snow. Memorable though! Southern red cedars do smell pretty grand. Thanks for the comments!

Thanks. I always appreciate anyone taking time to create new versions, but the colorful sky and cheerful light belie the truth of the matter: it was a dreary, rainy day, we cut the tree in the rain, and Jack hauled it home under gloomy skies. It is often possible to retrieve the blues hiding beneath rainclouds and while I've done it sometimes for travel pictures myself, I don't want to change the emotional memory of this one. Thanks though.

Yes, Roel, you are right. The house is the constant. I have a companion picture of Jack at age 3 in that same spot playing ball with a different dog on Christmas Day. Now 13, his role in relation to the house, the farm, and Christmas, is different. Thus it has been in the 120 year history of the old farm. There's a picture of my uncle, taken in 1912, playing with a dog in the same spot.

Agree. Superior skills, unusual choices.

Thanks Andrew. (Though I hadn't thought of Sally Mann, I had thought of a monochrome conversion)

Thanks Arvo. The edited version is way more cheerfully colorful than was the day and situation I was trying to convey.

Thank you minniev.

The huge red heart is the first thing that attracts attention. The other colours are mainly subdued red tones of the brick and the blues and blacks of the couple’s clothing, so the bold red of the heart has no competing bright colour and dominates the scene. The colour red and the heart are both powerful symbols for love, so inevitably the couple stood right in front of the heart are assumed to be in love, even if that is not the case. Although they stand close to each other, body language implies that maybe they are not actually a couple. Yet? Maybe that is why the tip of the heart is still buried! It is a lovely street photo with a story, which is open to interpretation.

The second is different. This time the bright red does not highlight an emotion, but the woman herself. Not only the colour, but also her dress style, helps her stand out from crowd, and makes her an interesting subject in a mundane scene. It is another well observed and captured street photo.

Minnie has summed up my response perfectly, so I will only add that I too wondered about cropping something off the bottom, but scrolling down to hide the bottom quickly showed that doing so spoiled the balance of the composition, and the original version was far superior.

Agree with what Roel says about this excellent image, which had the power to spark the interesting comments and alternate takes which followed.
I have been experimenting with showing movement recently, and know how difficult it is, and can appreciate the success of this one. Having a sharp(ish) portion as a pivotal point of the image can be helpful, but even totally blurred images can work well, although they usually require more work for the viewer to understand what is going on. Adding sharpening to this is tricky, because a very sharp section next to a blurry one just doesn’t look right, and would need to be carefully restricted and feathered, so actually I wouldn’t bother.

I’ve tried to photograph butterflies in flight, but found it difficult, or even impossible, to find the in the viewfinder, let alone get one with outstretched wings! So well done indeed.

This was a good case study showing the difference between what is technically possible and the mood or style the author is trying to convey.
There is a subdued winter feeling, but also a feeling of optimism, as Lumber Jack and Zeke the dog bring home the tree for the centrepiece of the enjoyable Christmas festivities, which will shake off those winter blues.

Thank you Pete and Bryan.

The critiques have been useful and show that my photo is a complete failure!
The photo shows a smiling face in the first showcase and a devil mask in the second. As the title implied, I was trying to show the evil being that can be a threat to happiness or even be behind an apparently innocent person. I wanted the devil mask to be peering out, almost hidden, which would make the devil more sinister. However, I seem to have hidden it so well, that nobody even recognised what it was, and Roel even suggested I should clone it out! Oh well, back to the drawing board.

With your short description here of the evil one lurking in the background behind the smiling face, the image becomes really quite good. I wouldn't call it a failure!

Very colourful!
...speaks of warm and sunny times

The image works quite well. As usual you've found a nice place with both light and shadow elements and made the best of it in your image.
The texture on the light stand looks good.
A cozy corner.
Incidently, we have a vaguely similar duck statue at home, maybe I can find a nice place to take a shot of him ;-)