# Arbour II



## Mohain (Dec 4, 2006)

I love how trees look this time of year just after loosing all their leaves. They lend the landscape a kind of sinister feel. Continuing my tree obsession ...

1.






2.





3.





4.





5.





I'm not that happy with the 2nd one but thought I would include it.

As always constructive C & C welcome.

Cheers,

Mohain


----------



## Dan28607 (Dec 4, 2006)

These are just awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Arch (Dec 4, 2006)

wow outstanding stuff mo... love the first few (glad you included the second  ).... and the last one is stunning, brilliant composition.... great work :thumbsup:


----------



## Tantalus (Dec 4, 2006)

I like 4 and 5, nice series.


----------



## woodsac (Dec 4, 2006)

Great series!

Nice processing. Love the comp on #5. #1 is just beautiful :thumbsup:


----------



## GrfxGuru (Dec 4, 2006)

Nice, they have a wonderful dreamy feel to them, I actually like the 2nd shot but the composition of the last is very nice.


----------



## CMan (Dec 4, 2006)

All great, but I love #1. How did you get the photo to have that look? It's amazing.


----------



## abraxas (Dec 4, 2006)

Killer stuff. Great mood and effect!


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 4, 2006)

That first one looks like the clouds are white flames scorching across the sky. brilliant effect.
And the last one is beautifull/ striking. thanks for showing


----------



## lostprophet (Dec 4, 2006)

they are rubbish













Nah just kidding 

Stunning
Awesome
Fantastic
Superb

You would not believe just how jealous I am of those shots

and just out of interest, where were they taken?


----------



## Mohain (Dec 4, 2006)

Thanks a lot for the comments  

Cman,  I used photomatix in the first and second shot.

LP, 2 was in Great Missenden, the rest were in Tring Park.

:mrgreen:


----------



## oldnavy170 (Dec 4, 2006)

I really REALLY love #1!!!!! Wonderful!!!!!


----------



## ShootHoops (Dec 4, 2006)

Where do you find all these great-looking clouds!? #1 :thumbup:


----------



## LaFoto (Dec 4, 2006)

You are not happy with #2?
Oh...

And you only included it - erm - just - so? To include it?
What is wrong with it?
Is it not sinister enough looking?

For I quite like it!

OF COURSE #1 is the most striking with a sky like that and the treatment you gave this picture. 

And #5 comes right after #1 ... but then there already is #2 on my list of favourites.

If such a "list" is even possible with your photos ... they are all always so good! Stay with your obsession - I find that trees are WONDERFUL subjects!!!


----------



## Puscas (Dec 4, 2006)

#5!!!, but all are jaw droppers (well, except for 3). Excellent stuff.





pascal


----------



## SpaceNut (Dec 5, 2006)

#1 is my favorite. Like the sky.


----------



## Mohain (Dec 5, 2006)

Thanks a lot folks, I appreciate it :mrgreen:

LaFoto. Weeeeeelllllll ... I'm not that happy with how the sky turned out after processing. There's an annoying burnt out highlight above the horizon near the middle and I dodged the highlights out in the tree but have left it with a bit of a halo and a bit uneven. Also I don't think I did the lay of the land justice. It's a lovely area, a gentle rolling valley with a village beyond in the woods and fields. It's a beautiful view and I've tried to shoot it several times but I've never been really happy with any of the pics I've taken of it (this is probably the one I'm _most_ happy with tho). I think I could improve it with a re-process (and almost certainly a reshoot). Why did I include it? Well, this is going to sound really silly but ... I don't really like to show pics in twos or fours if I can help it (although 'Arbour I' was only 2 shots, I really tried to make it 3 but couldn't). I think pics look better in sets of 1, 3, 5 or more! Plus I'm happyin-ish with it, but not _that_ happy with it 

TheFinisher3, I'm always on the lookout at the w/e for interesting clouds and try to get out shooting quicky if the clouds are starting to look funky. The wife thinks I'm an idiot tho :mrgreen:


----------



## kamilla (Dec 5, 2006)

These are fantastic!!! Composition, light, mood....OMG


----------



## tpe (Dec 5, 2006)

Ha, well if you want criticism you will have to post something else, excelent.

tim


----------



## Mohain (Dec 6, 2006)

hah, thanks tpe & kamilla. and thanks cman for the nomination, I really appreciate it :mrgreen:


----------



## Mole (Dec 6, 2006)

I love the whole series, the composition on the last 2 is just amazing. How did you get that effect?


----------



## JTHphoto (Dec 8, 2006)

great series mo, these are all awesome shots.  :thumbup:


----------



## Mohain (Dec 9, 2006)

Thanks a lot JTH & Moley  Mole, the first two are 3 exposures, 2 stops apart and then merged and tone mapped in Photomatix.


----------



## Chiller (Dec 9, 2006)

Wow, Mo. Excellent as always.   Would make a great series framed and hung on a wall.


----------



## Steel26 (Dec 9, 2006)

#1 and #2 are my favorite.  I can kinda see what you mean though on #2.  the burning could be a tiny bit better and for my taste the tree could be about 3mm to the right.  but really those things are the difference between a 9.9 pic and a 10.  Its still phenomenal.


----------



## charlie88 (Dec 11, 2006)

1,2, & 5. Are my favorites, amazing shots.


----------



## ceecookie (Dec 15, 2006)

I spotted The 2nd pic being nominated for POTM and i simply love that shot..sinister look as agreed and i wonder why it remind me of the movie "Big Fish"


----------



## Andrea K (Dec 15, 2006)

These are unreal!  Awesome!


----------



## myopia (Dec 15, 2006)

i like #5 the best. all awsome shots though. these are awsome.


----------



## emo (Dec 16, 2006)

aweome work as always.. :thumbsup: love those B&W


----------



## Krestan (Dec 17, 2006)

2!!!! I want to go there tell me where it is!!!! I love it:heart: :heart: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## djengizz (Jan 19, 2007)

I really like the drama in your pictures and i think you have some great b&w stuff.
Respect!


----------



## Mohain (Jan 19, 2007)

Heh, didn't notice the bump :blushing: 

Thanks, your too kind  

Krestan, it's near Great Missenden, Bucks, England, UK.

Cheers everyone :mrgreen:


----------



## abraxas (Jan 19, 2007)

Mohain said:


> ...
> Continuing my tree obsession ...
> ...



These are worth commenting on again.

#4 & 5 remind me of a story by John Steinbeck, 'To a God Unknown.'

Mr. Trask, became obsessed with a tree in his backyard- in fact, he went as far as to worship this tree as a god.  He would nail dried ears from sows that he had slaughtered to the tree as offerings. He treated his kids and wife miserable. The kids grew up really messed up. The book was very dark.

In a later book, one of the messed up kids married a prostitute that was messed up. She had two kids and then deserted them all. The kids became really messed up. This story became Steinbeck's classic, 'East of Eden.' This was dark too.

It has been at least 30 years since I read these books, so my synopsis is probably- messed up.

Great shots;


----------



## Mohain (Jan 19, 2007)

Cool! Thanks abraxas, the books sound great. I shall definitely look them up :thumbup:


----------



## Jeremy Z (Jan 19, 2007)

Heavily-doctored photos like this always leave me confused.

At first glance, they are quite striking.

But then, my brain says: "...but they don't really look natural"

These photos (and many others here) are only 1/2 photography.  The other half is image processing.  But they are 100% art.  As art, they are quite outstanding.  As photography... I'd have to see the originals, but I suspect they are quite good as well. 

Your composition is quite excellent.  Kudos.

Do we have a forum for photos that are pure & undoctored?


----------



## Mohain (Jan 20, 2007)

Haha  

Thank you for your comments. 

I'm not going to start a discussion here about what you have said. There is no point anyway



Jeremy Z said:


> Do we have a forum for photos that are pure & undoctored?


 
There is no such thing  With the greatest of respect you cannot fully understand the photographic process and make comments like that  

Many thanks

Mohain


----------



## djengizz (Jan 20, 2007)

Mohain said:


> There is no such thing


Exactly, there is no such thing as an undoctered photo. 
As a photographer you make all kinds of decisions when taking, developing and presenting a picture. All photographs are just an interpretation of the real thing anyway .
For me this is photography all the way.


----------



## Jeremy Z (Jan 20, 2007)

Mohain said:


> There is no such thing  With the greatest of respect you cannot fully understand the photographic process and make comments like that


Oh, but I *do* understand the process.  I've shot, developed, and printed my own images.  I've also doctored my own images in software.

My point was that if I look at a photo and one of the first things that I feel is that it looks good but not natural, it's too much doctoring for my taste.  Each film puts its own bias on an image, some more than others.  Each digital camera also does its own processing, to some extent.  But I generally don't look at them and think: "that doesn't look natural" I think "what nice bright colors!" or "what nice skin tones!".

There is no need to talk down to someone because his opinion is not 100% positive.  That is why you posted here, right?  To get honest opinions and not to search for nonstop praise.  Well, that is why I post at least.

From this thread, you have learned that XX number of people viewed your images.  Of those, YY cared enough to comment.  Of those, ZZ people thought they were outstanding.  You have learned (or reaffirmed) that heavy-handed modifications are not for everyone, but that more people like it than not.

From my own photos, I don't get as many views or as much feedback, and more of my feedback is criticism.  There's always room to learn more, no matter how good one thinks one is.


----------



## Jeremy Z (Jan 20, 2007)

I guess it is just a matter of where different people draw the line.


----------



## abraxas (Jan 20, 2007)

Jeremy Z said:


> I guess it is just a matter of where different people draw the line.



This subject is intriguing to me.  Possibly, rather than further skewing the "purity & intention" of the stats here, it could be picked up in this forum;

Photographic Discussions
A place to discuss what photography means to you: your influences, ethical challenges, abstract ideas, and other non-technical matters about photography and photographers.

Certainly it would be interesting to examine different view points.


----------

