thoughts on some B and W's?

I just shot these locally near my house and i would like some critiques and comments. anything is welcome :) haha which one is your favorite?





[View:http://community.the-digital-picture...awaii/utility/http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2700/...5490e6ef58.jpg]





[View:http://community.the-digital-picture...awaii/utility/http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4065/...29bd7c7d_b.jpg]





[View:http://community.the-digital-picture...awaii/utility/http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2744/...2145ccbd_b.jpg]





[View:http://community.the-digital-picture...awaii/utility/http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4016/...eb664530_b.jpg]





thanks in advance :)

The third and the second (in this order) are my favorites, the others are not even close to the third/second's level - that is my opinion at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oren

The third and the second (in this order) are my favorites, the others are not even close to the third/second's level - that is my opinion at least.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

Agree completely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mpphoto12

which one is your favorite?

---

#1. Because I just can't get through the slanted forground and utter darkness of the next two. The last is not B &amp; W.


In the first shot, the snow and winding stream anchor me into the image and lead me through the landscape. I think the branches in the foreground need to be a little further out, meaning the comp would have worked better had you taken several more steps forward and allowed them to frame around the edge of the image rather than intrude on the space. I wasn't there, so I'm not sure of the obstacles faced.


I'm not a big fan of B&amp;W landscapes. To me the beauty is not only in the grandeur but in the color as well. Ansel shot B&amp;W because it was all he had to work with. IMHO, I thought you went a little too heavy on the contrast which causes a serious loss of detail in the reductions. B&amp;W's need lot's of dynamic range to work well on landscapes. I'd love to see them gamma'd up, printed on 17" glossy paper, mounted, and framed. My appreciation for the scene would probably be a lot different.


BTW, did you use a circular polarizer? That'll really make the sky pop color-wisein the secondimage which is the strength of that one. The telephone poles unfortunately detract. Darn those modern conviences...[:@] I like the sycamore tree in the 3rd one. I'd crop 1:2 to stretch and remove at least half of the dark field in the lower foreground. That sycamore will dominate and provide more of a startingpoint and place of initial interest in the overall image. The 1:2 will create more breadth giving the image a wider more open space feel.


Thanks for sharing your work and allowing us to comment. I truly hopemy comments are constructive.

thanks that really helps :) i did not use a polarizer i dont have one i only used my 70-200 2.8 for the 3rd shot and the rest my 18-55 kit lens :( but i just threw in the last one becasue i shot it the night i posted this thread haha

I agree with Chuck that a CPL would give a lot more pop to the sky. The first would probably be my favorite except for the business of the foreground branches. Also, the first image seems to show that there is dust on your sensor. A healing brush should fix that pretty quick. I would like to see the 2nd and third with more sky and less road which would utilize the rule of thirds. Good shots.