Kaushik Balakumar
While on the hiking path, I noticed this scene with a lone tree on the ridge of the mountain.
First thought in my mind was a B&W image of the same.
The image was exposed for the sky to contains just the details (i.e. without getting blown) while the FG was looking dark.
I do have sufficient details in shadows but while PP, I deliberately pulled it down further.
There were few interfering branches from nearby + some bushes on the far grassland which I did'nt want to be seen.
I also over-exposed the sky to give a high-key effect.
My thoughts on doing so was that retaining colour and texture in sky (that of overcast clouds) or the FG (that of grassland + bushes + few distracting branches) would make the image more complex and detract the viewer from a simple graphic representation of the scene.
The original was a 2:3 ratio, but I added some canvas on top to give it a square-ish format.

Would love to know ur thoughts on the image.
Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:26 pm
Kaushik Balakumar's CNP Gallery       |      Send PM to Kaushik Balakumar     |       [NEW] Recent Comments by Kaushik Balakumar

website | facebook | blog

Kaushik Balakumar  Joined CNP On 25 May 2008    Total Image posts 37    -   Total Image Comments 373    -   Image Post to Comment Ratio 1:10    -   Image Comment Density 43     -     Total Forum Posts 8

Rating & SHARING

Login to rate this image

Post a comment


Commentby Kaushik Balakumar on Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:29 pm

Also presenting the 2:3 format.

website | facebook | blog

Commentby Ganesh H Shankar on Fri Jul 23, 2010 8:26 am

Kaushik, I agreed with all your decision of processing related to under exposing foreground to create silhoutte and over exposing the sky. However my first impression was(without looking the 2:3 image) 2:3 may balance the composition better. My current stand though is you did the right thing by going for a square format !! Years of "learning" prevents us of learning new things !! 2:3 seem to make it routine while the square one seem to add some artistic aura and uniqueness to the image. May be I would experiment with burning lightened stone region in lower just a bit. Nice learning here and thanks for sharing your thoughts and 2:3 image.

Ganesh H. Shankar
Wishing you best light,

Personal Websites Fine Art Nature Photography | www.ArtOfLife.Gallery
Facebook Pages Ganesh H. Shankar | Fine Art Nature Photography | Art Of Life

» Last edited by Ganesh H Shankar on Fri Jul 23, 2010 8:29 am; edited 1 time in total

Commentby sandeep somasekharan on Sat Jul 24, 2010 8:05 pm

I seem to like the square one, maybe because I am a more negative space oriented guy :)

Commentby Pramod Viswanath on Sat Jul 24, 2010 9:39 pm

I am sort of torn between both the versions Kaushik. The square format emphasis and anchors my focus on the biggest tree and its communication with the hills on the left. On the contrary, in the case 2:3 format, every little tree in the frame screams its importance of existence in the frame/scene. Even if you had eliminated a single tree/element in the frame, it would have thrown the image into an imbalance state. Excellent creation here and I love both the images for its own individual flair!!

Pramod Viswanath
Frames from wild | My Blog
Our only limitation is imagination !

Commentby Prithvi K on Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:56 am

Beautiful image Kaushik, I like both the formats.
In the 2/3rd format, you could crop 1cm from the bottom to bring more emphasis to the lone tree.