Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Ummm, trees
Comments:
I suspect a large format subject taken with a small format camera.
I'm interested by the subject matter, but not by the representation. Sorry.
The differences of the trees - bark, ivy, colour etc. - juxtapose well. The composition, though, is not strong enough; mainly because the near abstract quality inherent in the first three (if cropped to the left hand edge) is not carried through to the trees at the back. I like the foot-like nature of the third tree in and the latter also has the strongest abstract relationship with the red tree.
John E: the "untitled" is something that I added. JohnJo left the field blank, and that screws up the indexing in the right hand column. I'm assuming that JohnJo will edit the title if he simply omited it by mistake.
The comparison of textures in the bark of the trees has some appeal. The break in the line of trees separates the last few and they don't quite join in with the first three.
The middle tree sure is a flourescent shade green, but I wonder if auspicious isn't right about the format.
I'm with auspicious on this (though only the execution and not the medium). I really think there is a lot of potential in this shot. The tree colours and positioning all work but some of the 'extra' foilage and bright spots detracts. I'd definitely try this one again from a number of different angles.
Post a Comment
I'm interested by the subject matter, but not by the representation. Sorry.
