I wonder what aspect of this photograph is compelling? It appears to me to be largely out of focus. It throws the rule of 1/3's to the wind. 80% of the image is a boring dirt road. There's no tonal range to the clouds, or anything else for that matter. Both the lights and darks are clipped.

I thought the dark shapes on the hill crest were cows, but a closer view would seem to indicate trees. I was also surprised to find what appears to be a graveyard, it may have been interesting, shot from farther down the road.

Captured another 100 meters down the road, on the other side, with a wide angle lens to capture both the stone wall, graveyard, hills, and clouds, it may have been a great image. That's assuming it could have been processed to show good range. As is, I would have probably deleted it.

I'm always seeking education, so please, someone tell me what I'm missing.

What drew us to this photograph was the perspective, and the tones of the photograph. The shot is well put together in composition, the rule of 3rds doesn't always have to be adhered too. I know plenty of photographs where the golden rules are broken and they look just dynamite!

While I understand your points, rules are good guidelines and don't always dictate the necessity of a good photograph. Sometimes I think it just comes down to "I just like that!". Don't you agree?

And I won't try to talk you into it, you are set on your opinion, and thats perfectly ok too :).

What one person may like another may not. I know some people who think Ansel Adams photographs are boring because they have no interest in landscapes and only like color photographs.

Guess sometimes it just boils down to taste, sorry you don't like it!

Carl

Well, I welcome any thoughts and ideas with regards the shot. I have no desire to defend it, but will offer my reasons for taking it.
I did spend some time wandering around, I liked the perspective and winding stone wall. What you cannot see it from is the reverse angle..which is a car park, leading onto the beach. So I passed up on that one. As for the composition, I was lying on the wall when I took the shot. I am keen to ignore the rule of thirds as much as possible.

Shooting into the setting sun, I biased the exposure more to the highlights, but yes some are clipped, and some shadow tones are also. But that is a pretty good thing for many mono shots, and overall, the image has a good tonal range from dark to light. It is slightly softer than the resized one I posted, probably due to another resize, however..printed it is not a photo that demands "absolute sharpenss" the idea is to convey "age" and being somewhat older.

I guess it is down to personal taste, I have no problems getting some stick for not sticking to the rule of thirds, or by not creating perfect histograms. Both are just guides IMHO. Not sure it warrants a "delete" comment though..

Carl, I doubt I'd have made any comments if the image was simply a normal post. When selected for special merit, I'm interested what others discern that I'm apparently oblivious to.

Yes, "I like that" is all you need to say, additional explanation is not necessary. I've taken more images than I can count that illicit little interest in others, but I find mesmerizing. Believe it or not, I was truly looking for guidance on what I was missing that you found compelling.

Graham

Sorry for the additional commentary that wasn't necessary Graham :). I felt it necessary to explain the entire reasoning for the post. Eric and I agreed on this image together.

Carl

Barry,

I agree, "I'd delete it" was over the top. I think the location is very compelling, and I do enjoy black and white. I'd like to see a series of images from that location, different perspectives, different framing.

I think the image you posted would benefit from some curve layers, perhaps with layer masks. Perhaps some doging and burning. A compelling aspect of black and white is the play of light on dark, I'd like to see you develop that aspect a bit more.

I think my major point with the image is the rather nondescript foreground, without a major point of interest. Had the image been taken from the road, you could have captured the stacked stone wall from the side. Standing on top, the gravel infill is too similar to the road to give any real interest. The rules of thirds can certainly be disregarded, but in this instance, I think the strong cloudy sky and the hills would have given the image a lot of punch.

I agree with your sharpness statement, but with the immediate foreground out of focus, why keep it in the image? I don't know how convenient the location is to you. It's my normal practice to take as many exposures as practical, with different apertures, framing, filters, lens' and perspective as I have time for. While my judgement in the field as to settings is often correct, I'm not surprised to find an image I find more compelling once post processing begins.

I hope you find yourself back in this location again. I'd like to see more.

Graham

The long winding dirt road leads the eye through the image to what I presume is a village and then the mountains soften by the moist atmosphere. The B&W handling makes it dramatic while active in splotches of gray here and there on the rough rocky curbside. It is very rough and coarse countryside and the image makes me want to hurry down the path before sunset huddle near an open fire before coldness sets in.

Where was this image taken Barry?

Really an excellent B&W subject and I really like the composition. Well done Barry!

That's my 2 cents and I'm stick'in to it! ;-)

Sometimes the feedback a photo receives puzzles me. It can be, and frequently is, all over the board and doesn’t seem predictable.

Some other guy on a different forum posted a “casual portrait” (read: snap shot) of his wife/girlfriend and got lots of good props for it even though it was taken in bright noon day sun with harsh shadows across her face, the composition was weak, the bokah was beyond bad, the girl was only semi pretty at best, with a bad complexion and crooked teeth. In other words, the shot wasn’t remotely interesting in any particular way. Everybody that bothered to respond gave the guy lots of love and made all sorts of warm fuzzy remarks about the good skin tones and whatever else seemed appropriate.

Now a compelling photo taken by Barry Fitzgerald, that I like quite a lot is posted, and he gets dumped on. The first photo probably did exhibit good skin tones, if there really is any proper way to expose a zit in bright sunlight, and Barry’s photo isn’t technically perfect, but no impartial person on earth would prefer the first photo over the second. Yet the first guy is feeling pretty good right now and Barry is licking his wounds. Go figure.

I suppose context has a lot to do with the response. The first guy simply posted a picture he had taken earlier and Barry’s shot is a “Prize Winner” so maybe Barry is being held to a higher standard. None the less, this sort of response makes me less than anxious to post any of the shots (again, read: snap shots) that I, up to this point, am happy with. I really don’t want anybody telling me that my favorite pictures are so bad that I should delete them from my hard drive. Not that anything I’ve ever snapped is going to be singled out or recognized in any positive way, but you know what I mean.

Ray

Hi Ray, well I can see what you are saying. I am not so sure the motivation for the ist comment is 100% based on photography, but there we go. I honestly have no problems with anyone making some suggestions, or ideas etc. None at all.

I guess we are all still learning, and the views and ideas of others are worthy of at least consideration. All I would ask, like I do myself with commenting..is to keep it "positive". I would not dream of slapping down even something which I thought was just poor..rather offer some suggestions to the poster. Nobody needs to hear below the belt comments. It just makes you look bad as well. Plus you get no benefit from it either. As it stands, no the shot is not perfect, but IMO, and I say so myself, its not bad!

We all have out own thoughts on things, and compositions etc. I went in tight on the sky, I often do this if I dont think it warrants frame space, in this instance the mould on the large rock drew my eye, and I kept that, over the not much else happening sky. I guess if a 100 people were at the same location, we would get 100 different shots. If I gave that shot to 100 people, they would pp probably in many different ways. I did some mild dodge and burn, but I try to keep it minimal if possible, just not keen on monster d&b for most shots.

I think most photographers are deeply self critical, even if they do not say so. I lose interest in shots after a while, and admit I take ropey ones like everyone else does ;-) So I welcome a bit of critique, so long as it is a bit more upbeat, rather than just negative.