John Roach
June 2018 - Cape Hatteras Lighthouse
About the Image(s)
This image was taken with my Fuji X-Pro2 along with 18-55mm f2.8-4 at 19.6mm, ISO 250, 1/1000s, f/10, -1 EV, Aperture Priority, Lightroom and Nik Silver Efex.
This round’s discussion is now closed!
9 comments posted
A great structure. I like the clouds which adds an element of drama. I would clone out the antenna to the left of the lighthouse. Posted: 06/09/2018 15:56:19
A classic scene well done, but I agree about cloning out the antenna. Posted: 06/09/2018 16:15:30
I just can't agree. That is the scene. It is part of the story. Posted: 06/09/2018 16:30:32
I tend to not clone out the tower with my work, but can understand both sides of the question. If you are intending to enter it in PTD or PJD you can't clone out the tower or any other picture element. The sky is great and the concentration of clouds behind the top makes that the clear center of interest and draws you there. The tower is about dead center left to right, and I think I like it that way. The strong "ribbon" around the tower makes a very strong monochrome. Posted: 06/10/2018 21:52:04
I like that the image is wonderfully sharp throughout. To my eye, the complex mix of patterns and textures are the most interesting features. Posted: 06/12/2018 08:46:24
I don't know the rules for PTD and PJD but I know the sort of thing you mean. I also know that some wildlife rules allow some modification of the picture for "improvement" provided it doesn't upset the depiction of the subject and its natural environment, and I've got to say that's the sort of rule I like. So, I would remove the antenna too, I think that pictorially it looks better. Posted: 06/18/2018 01:16:39
Thanks for the feedback.
Unfortunately, Stuart and Stan, I don't care about the various rules of PSA image exhibit, competition, etc. I pay no attention to them at all. They are never a factor in my reviews within the DD or PID SDG study groups. While I know they are listed on the DD website and within PSA.org, I couldn't even tell what they are, much less know what PTD or PJD or XYZ for that matter is, because I don't want to be bound by such rules, but rather by an artistic vision and create things that I think work, are beautiful, tell a story or are unique at time. I wonder how much reviews in all these study groups are impacted by those rules vs. alternatives ways of viewing. Indeed, in my long membership, I have never and will never submit images for that kind of approval or reward.
It is also interesting that when I took the image analysis course at PSA, such rules were not ever even mentioned. I just like, within these study groups and sometimes at a photographic art group get ideas from others about what they think works or doesn't work only within their personal aesthetic of photographic art. That is what is meaningful for me. I wonder, if I should not participate in study groups if the rules are a governing criteria within these reviews? Just wondering?
Now with that said, I can see that some folks don't like the attenna and others find it doesn't matter. So I will continue on my singular path of including it for my gallery exhibits and personal use, but I might pursue stock photo interest to see how it flies. Posted: 06/18/2018 11:05:16
Unfortunately, Stuart and Stan, I don't care about the various rules of PSA image exhibit, competition, etc. I pay no attention to them at all. They are never a factor in my reviews within the DD or PID SDG study groups. While I know they are listed on the DD website and within PSA.org, I couldn't even tell what they are, much less know what PTD or PJD or XYZ for that matter is, because I don't want to be bound by such rules, but rather by an artistic vision and create things that I think work, are beautiful, tell a story or are unique at time. I wonder how much reviews in all these study groups are impacted by those rules vs. alternatives ways of viewing. Indeed, in my long membership, I have never and will never submit images for that kind of approval or reward.
It is also interesting that when I took the image analysis course at PSA, such rules were not ever even mentioned. I just like, within these study groups and sometimes at a photographic art group get ideas from others about what they think works or doesn't work only within their personal aesthetic of photographic art. That is what is meaningful for me. I wonder, if I should not participate in study groups if the rules are a governing criteria within these reviews? Just wondering?
Now with that said, I can see that some folks don't like the attenna and others find it doesn't matter. So I will continue on my singular path of including it for my gallery exhibits and personal use, but I might pursue stock photo interest to see how it flies. Posted: 06/18/2018 11:05:16
To a large extent, I fully agree with you. I am at the point of not concerning myself with them and doing most of my exhibiting in PID and PPD where they do not exist. I have done a lot of exhibiting in Nature and PTD and they very much exist there. That is not my focus anymore. Posted: 06/24/2018 15:06:37
Another gem from your lighthouse collection. I liked perspective of the image with lighthouse pointing towards the cloud mast gathering overhead. Creates lot of drama. For me, environment is important which includes the antennae. Posted: 06/26/2018 02:52:56