Can't see the forest for the trees

[Kevin Childress]

I've had a terrible time trying to prepare this image for display and I'm looking for feedback on presentation to this point. This is literally an image that I've been pondering, in this very forest, for several years. I've previsualized this image for so long that now that I have it, I can no longer see the forest for the trees, if you take my point. I would have preferred a more balanced composition but I was wasting precious seconds moving around trying to improve the scene and finally had to settle down and take what I had at the moment. I tried a second composition about 30 seconds after capturing this one but clouds had already set in and the light was pretty much gone. For some reason I want to rotate this one to the left a bit but that didn't seem to help so I left it as-is.

[Nick Weall]

Hi Kevin

I think that if the principal tree on the left was to be coming out of the bottom left-hand corner then it might have been possible to get the principal tree on the right coming out of the bottom right-hand corner. There seems to be a little avenue of trees then disappearing into the distance.

The sun would be nearer one of the rule of thirds intersection as a result too.

Of course in practice the sun would have set or been clouded over as you swivelled the camera and possibly shifted the  tripod  too. :)

[Kevin Childress]

Nick Weall wrote:

I think that if the principal tree on the left was to be coming out of the bottom left-hand corner then it might have been possible to get the principal tree on the right coming out of the bottom right-hand corner. Of course in practice the sun would have set or been clouded over as you swivelled the camera and possibly shifted the tripod too. 

Hello, Nick; nice to hear from you.  And by George, I think you're onto something here, mate!  I tried like mad to move the tripod to the right and angle the camera more to the left, but that little crooked tree to the right of the sun was killing that angle and there was just no time to search out another stand of trees.  But I think your observation about the placement of the principal tree on the right is just the answer I was looking for on the composition!  The image posted in the OP is cropped down ~20% to tighten up the field of view just a bit. But the original field of view should allow for a horizontal perspective adjustment (which never occurred to me) and that might get what you're suggesting.

I hate the thought of trying to process this one again but its probably worth the effort. I'll wait to see if anyone else has a suggestion before I venture that way.  Thanks, Nick!

 

[kenfowkes]

It's a lovely setting Kevin, for sure. When I'm out with my camera, one of the decisions I make when I find myself in a a beautiful spot is, should I try to make a photograph, or should I just look and appreciate the setting? Looking at all those trunks creating such strong lines, with little option to frame without chopping one in an uncomfortable place, and knowing how much that would bother me, I likely would have just settled in for a good look. I have seen such shots done well, and sometimes wonder of the photographer took a chainsaw to the forest beforehand. In any case, I'll be of little help to you, having never managed to pull one of these off, and not for lack of trying.

I know you like portrait oriented photos, so you surely considered that as you were visualizing your shot. What happens for me when I look at this is the trunks lead my attention up and out the top of the frame. I'm wondering if that would still happen had there been more of the canopy up high in the frame, crossing in front of the main trunks or even ending them. It would be a bit strange, I admit, to have that wonderful starburst sun even lower in the frame, but I can't help wondering how a portrait shot would work here.

Love the back-lit yellow undergrowth.

[Kevin Childress]

kenfowkes wrote:

When I'm out with my camera, one of the decisions I make when I find myself in a a beautiful spot is, should I try to make a photograph, or should I just look and appreciate the setting? ... I likely would have just settled in for a good look.

I know you like portrait oriented photos, so you surely considered that as you were visualizing your shot. 

Very good input, Ken, and much appreciated. I had about 45 minutes to enjoy the view until this climax arrived so I felt pretty good about taking it all in.  :)    And that's a funny thing about preference to one orientation over the other: There was a time when I'd shoot nearly everything in portrait orientation!  I tried a portrait crop on a couple others that were shot prior to this but I just didn't find anything with the height that I expected to see in portrait.  I'll go back for another look. 

[Kevin Childress]

I made another go at this image based on Nick's observation about the balance of the composition. I had to start from scratch but I am much happier with this image. The composition was changed primarily using a healthy horizontal perspective adjustment which of course led to a slightly different vertical and rotated view. This was as close as I could get with balancing the two trees discussed in the earlier posts. But its not the change in composition that I like so much - its that I finally recognized the previous version was a terribly flat (and not very pretty) image!  Frankly, compared to the new version, I think the original image looks like $h!t !  Clearly I got bit from blending tones from multiple exposures on that one. The new version below is processed from a single exposure and I'm much happier with the highlights on this one! 

PS: Ken Fowkes,  I tried several portrait crops from several different files but nothing really appeals to me. I should have shot at least one vertically to capture the height but I just didn't take time to do it. Maybe next time, and there is always a next time ...  :)