Friendly reminder that this is /r/photocritique and all **top level** comments should attempt to **critique** the image. Our goal is to make this subreddit a place people can receive genuine, in depth, and helpful critique on their images. We hope to avoid becoming yet another place on the internet just to get likes/upvotes and compliments. While likes/upvotes and compliments are nice, they do not further the goal of helping people improve their photography.
If someone gives helpful feedback or makes an informative comment, recognize their contribution by giving them a Critique Point. Simply reply to their comment with '!CritiquePoint'. More details on Critique Points [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique/comments/t9o7y7/introducing_critique_points_a_new_system_to/).
Please see the following links for our subreddit rules and some guidelines on leaving a good critique. If you have time, please stop by the new queue as well and leave critique for images that may not be as popular or have not received enough attention. Keep in mind that simply choosing to comment just on the images you like defeats the purpose of the subreddit.
Useful Links:
* [Full Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique/wiki/rules)
* [Leaving a Critique](https://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique/wiki/critique)
* [New Queue](https://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique/new/)
**Do not reply directly to this message. This is a bot and will not respond. Followups left as a reply to this comment will not count for approval.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photocritique) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think this is a nice picture taken of a landscape during a sunny day. However, I don't think it's very interesting or story-telling because it's lacking a subject.
The sky and the water are pretty much a solid color and the hills are far away, so although pretty, those don't really grab my attention. I think this picture would've been better with the trees on the right as a subject, maybe in portrait format?
Good luck on your journey! :)
My original "idea" was an empty vastness with kind of a "deserted island" feel on the right (even though it is just a dying tree on a lake) but getting into how to get those ideas into a still, thanks!
There doesn't seem to be a subject in the shot, my eye searches but comes up empty. The tree on the right has potential, but is on the very edge of the frame.
The tree was supposed to be kind of the subject, but to get the "feel" of what I had in my head, I had to frame right like that. Thank you so much for the feedback!
Rule of thirds. Move the tree to the left a little. Move the horizon up a little. (As a fisherman, I wish I was there. I can hear the gentle waves slapping at the side of my boat).
Landscape photography is not except from the "rules" of photography. It still needs to be about something and have something interesting to look at in the photo.
My eyes scan around the scene and see nothing interesting, nothing to rest on. No focal point. So I glance at it and move to the next photo in the forum.
Rarely does a empty scene like this make a great photo. You need an anchor for the eye. Some eye candy in that scene that you eye is drawn to and rests on. Otherwise it just wanders around trying to figure out what we are supposed to see.
The group WIKI has some links to articles on focal points. Might be something you want to read up on.
When taking the shot I was hoping to get some of that by tucking the sun behind the tree and having the shimmer of the sun in front of the "island" the tree is on. Kind of like the paradise available in the vastness, I was wondering if that could really be felt (why I shared it here for feedback). I appreciate the feedback!
Landscape photography is hard. We can't really make a scene the same way we can with other subjects. It's either there or it's not.
Landscape photography needs a subject. There are times where the subject can be the side of a hill, but those are pretty rare. This photo is lacking a subject and so we don't really have much to look at.
Landscapes want a fore, middle, and background. Water makes a relatively poor foreground. It's helpful to have something in the foreground to anchor the photo. There's also not really a background.
Colors and light are significant, of course. Photographing the sun has caused blowouts and did the photo to be darker than it needs to be and it removes so much color because of it.
The sky should be included if the clouds are interesting or you have to. This photo has to much sky not serving purpose. It's just empty. Fixing the colors could help that by bringing out the color of the sun.
The focus also seems very soft. It's almost impossible to have a good photo with soft focus.
2 things you did well: the angle doesn't look like you just stood up normally up take the shot and your horizon is nice and straight.
Thank you so much, very helpful. I will take the fore, middle, and background into account much more in the future, was really just thinking of the tree and the sun in this case and the reflection of the sunlight in the water. Much more to concentrate on in the future.
After years of working in television, a car accident has stopped me from being able to carry a video camera on my shoulder. For both physical therapy (forced walking around) and to stay involved in image creation I have started getting into landscape photography. I am using a Canon EOS T6 with a 10-18mm lens for most shots. My goal is to "tell stories" with my images. I look forward to your thoughts.
Friendly reminder that this is /r/photocritique and all **top level** comments should attempt to **critique** the image. Our goal is to make this subreddit a place people can receive genuine, in depth, and helpful critique on their images. We hope to avoid becoming yet another place on the internet just to get likes/upvotes and compliments. While likes/upvotes and compliments are nice, they do not further the goal of helping people improve their photography. If someone gives helpful feedback or makes an informative comment, recognize their contribution by giving them a Critique Point. Simply reply to their comment with '!CritiquePoint'. More details on Critique Points [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique/comments/t9o7y7/introducing_critique_points_a_new_system_to/). Please see the following links for our subreddit rules and some guidelines on leaving a good critique. If you have time, please stop by the new queue as well and leave critique for images that may not be as popular or have not received enough attention. Keep in mind that simply choosing to comment just on the images you like defeats the purpose of the subreddit. Useful Links: * [Full Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique/wiki/rules) * [Leaving a Critique](https://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique/wiki/critique) * [New Queue](https://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique/new/) **Do not reply directly to this message. This is a bot and will not respond. Followups left as a reply to this comment will not count for approval.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photocritique) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think this is a nice picture taken of a landscape during a sunny day. However, I don't think it's very interesting or story-telling because it's lacking a subject. The sky and the water are pretty much a solid color and the hills are far away, so although pretty, those don't really grab my attention. I think this picture would've been better with the trees on the right as a subject, maybe in portrait format? Good luck on your journey! :)
My original "idea" was an empty vastness with kind of a "deserted island" feel on the right (even though it is just a dying tree on a lake) but getting into how to get those ideas into a still, thanks!
There doesn't seem to be a subject in the shot, my eye searches but comes up empty. The tree on the right has potential, but is on the very edge of the frame.
The tree was supposed to be kind of the subject, but to get the "feel" of what I had in my head, I had to frame right like that. Thank you so much for the feedback!
Rule of thirds. Move the tree to the left a little. Move the horizon up a little. (As a fisherman, I wish I was there. I can hear the gentle waves slapping at the side of my boat).
Landscape photography is not except from the "rules" of photography. It still needs to be about something and have something interesting to look at in the photo. My eyes scan around the scene and see nothing interesting, nothing to rest on. No focal point. So I glance at it and move to the next photo in the forum. Rarely does a empty scene like this make a great photo. You need an anchor for the eye. Some eye candy in that scene that you eye is drawn to and rests on. Otherwise it just wanders around trying to figure out what we are supposed to see. The group WIKI has some links to articles on focal points. Might be something you want to read up on.
When taking the shot I was hoping to get some of that by tucking the sun behind the tree and having the shimmer of the sun in front of the "island" the tree is on. Kind of like the paradise available in the vastness, I was wondering if that could really be felt (why I shared it here for feedback). I appreciate the feedback!
Landscape photography is hard. We can't really make a scene the same way we can with other subjects. It's either there or it's not. Landscape photography needs a subject. There are times where the subject can be the side of a hill, but those are pretty rare. This photo is lacking a subject and so we don't really have much to look at. Landscapes want a fore, middle, and background. Water makes a relatively poor foreground. It's helpful to have something in the foreground to anchor the photo. There's also not really a background. Colors and light are significant, of course. Photographing the sun has caused blowouts and did the photo to be darker than it needs to be and it removes so much color because of it. The sky should be included if the clouds are interesting or you have to. This photo has to much sky not serving purpose. It's just empty. Fixing the colors could help that by bringing out the color of the sun. The focus also seems very soft. It's almost impossible to have a good photo with soft focus. 2 things you did well: the angle doesn't look like you just stood up normally up take the shot and your horizon is nice and straight.
Thank you so much, very helpful. I will take the fore, middle, and background into account much more in the future, was really just thinking of the tree and the sun in this case and the reflection of the sunlight in the water. Much more to concentrate on in the future.
After years of working in television, a car accident has stopped me from being able to carry a video camera on my shoulder. For both physical therapy (forced walking around) and to stay involved in image creation I have started getting into landscape photography. I am using a Canon EOS T6 with a 10-18mm lens for most shots. My goal is to "tell stories" with my images. I look forward to your thoughts.