# Lake huron



## ZombiesniperJr (Jul 18, 2017)

c&c please

1


Landscape2 by Logan Baldwin, on Flickr
2


Landscape by Logan Baldwin, on Flickr


----------



## dxqcanada (Jul 18, 2017)

There is a lack of strong subject ... the water, sky, and background land aren't enough.
You need more experience with Landscape ... I mean keep shooting, landscape takes more mental effort than wildlife ... as the entire scene is the subject as opposed to a single bird/animal. Make sure to figure out what you are actually trying to capture, then hone in on it.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jul 18, 2017)

Oh, and straighten the horizon ... that is one a big thing with landscapes.


----------



## waday (Jul 18, 2017)

Agree with @dxqcanada , there's a lack of subject.

But, these could make good minimalist shots? Processed on my phone, so please excuse the quality.


----------



## ZombiesniperJr (Jul 18, 2017)

waday said:


> Agree with @dxqcanada , there's a lack of subject.
> 
> But, these could make good minimalist shots? Processed on my phone, so please excuse the quality.
> 
> View attachment 143633


Yep although i have to ask what does minimalist mean?


----------



## waday (Jul 18, 2017)

ZombiesniperJr said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> > Agree with @dxqcanada , there's a lack of subject.
> ...


Good question. Let's see... A photo where the the simplicity adds to the quality of the photo? I can think of a better definition tomorrow when I'm more awake.

Take a look through the photo theme on here for some examples: The Abstract/Minimalist Thread !


----------



## dxqcanada (Jul 18, 2017)

Less can be more ... like just showing a picture of just the ripples of water.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jul 18, 2017)

Wildlife photographers tend to concentrate on a single thing, visually ignoring everything else ... I know that happens to me a lot.
A good landscape photographer concentrates how everything in the scene works together.
The minimalist approach is to keep the number of objects to a minimum ... could be one interesting branch sticking out of the water.


----------



## ZombiesniperJr (Jul 18, 2017)

dxqcanada said:


> Wildlife photographers tend to concentrate on a single thing, visually ignoring everything else ... I know that happens to me a lot.
> A good landscape photographer concentrates how everything in the scene works together.
> The minimalist approach is to keep the number of objects to a minimum ... could be one interesting branch sticking out of the water.


I need to do it at a marsh near my camp but that will have to happen in two weeks after the east coast trip


----------



## jcdeboever (Jul 19, 2017)

Here is a book I've been studying. It is excellent. 
John Hedgecoe's Landscape Photography:Amazon:Books


----------



## WesternGuy (Jul 19, 2017)

Logan, this might give you some ideas about minimalism - Keep it Simple - A Guide to Minimalist Photography | Contrastly .  Not that minimalism is a necessity for good landscape images.  It is just one approach.  Landscape images that include water, such as yours, need a foreground element to provide an initial focal point for the viewer - this is why (IMHO) beaches are often included in "open" water images.  These images then need something to carry the viewer's eye through the rest of the image.  The foreground element is what is missing in your images.  As well, with images such as yours, you run into the age old question of where to place the horizon.  The "rule of thirds" can help with this.

Clouds can also be a powerful component of images taken over open water.  You have some in your images, but I would suggest you may want to consider making them a more significant part of images like these.  If this were the case, then the horizon would be placed at the lower thirds position and the sky "filled with clouds" - just a suggestion.

The other approach - don't know if it would work here, but it is worth thinking about - is to try a time lapse shot of the scene.  This flattens out the water and give some "motion" like component to the clouds.

I would encourage you to keep shooting, but do some reading - lots of good books and web sites around.

WesternGuy


----------



## snowbear (Jul 19, 2017)

Photoshop in a couple of Nessie-like humps.

Maybe go a step further and get enough shots for a panorama.


----------



## pendennis (Jul 19, 2017)

I've photographed a number of scenes along the Lake Huron coast, and the landscape/lakescape varies a great deal.  The area from the mouth of the lake at Port Huron, and up to Saginaw bay, tends to be a bit dull, unless you happen to catch the lake at sunrise.  One of the things that brightens the coast is the population of lighthouses, which add to the scenery.  However, the coast lacks a great deal of rockiness which adds to the scenery.  Even from Saginaw Bay, up through the Sturgeon Point and Thunder Bay areas, and up to Mackinac, the typical scene is a bit drab.

The Lake Huron coast suffers an inferiority complex compared to the state's Lake Michigan coast.  A lot of the difference owes to the prevailing winds which give the Lake Michigan coast a more "oceanic" appearance with its collection of sand dunes along the coast.

As to your photos, *the number one rule of water, is that it has to be horizontal*.  Lake water does not tilt one way or the other.  And, even if you're after a "minimalist" view, you're a bit too far from the outcropping of land in the background.  The second photo, especially lacks any landmarks which would attract the viewer's attention.

You don't state where the photos were made, and it would be helpful to know a bit more about the locale's geography.


----------



## ZombiesniperJr (Jul 19, 2017)

WesternGuy said:


> Logan, this might give you some ideas about minimalism - Keep it Simple - A Guide to Minimalist Photography | Contrastly .  Not that minimalism is a necessity for good landscape images.  It is just one approach.  Landscape images that include water, such as yours, need a foreground element to provide an initial focal point for the viewer - this is why (IMHO) beaches are often included in "open" water images.  These images then need something to carry the viewer's eye through the rest of the image.  The foreground element is what is missing in your images.  As well, with images such as yours, you run into the age old question of where to place the horizon.  The "rule of thirds" can help with this.
> 
> Clouds can also be a powerful component of images taken over open water.  You have some in your images, but I would suggest you may want to consider making them a more significant part of images like these.  If this were the case, then the horizon would be placed at the lower thirds position and the sky "filled with clouds" - just a suggestion.
> 
> ...


So that is one thing i will do next time get the beach in i was as close to the water as i could be and was trying to keep the ground out of it


----------



## dxqcanada (Jul 20, 2017)

dxqcanada said:


> Less can be more ...



... and sometimes less is just ... less.


----------



## weepete (Jul 20, 2017)

true. 

When I'm photographing landscapes, generally I try and include 4 major elements: something in the foreground, some stuff in the mid ground, and some distance and something to connect them (so some kind of line, a few broken lines, or even a point in between to draw the eye). Paths, roads etc are all good if they move the eye into the frame. Balance is important, so your eye should move around the frame (but not out of it, so contain curves of beaches if you can etc).  For simple landcapes look for an element tat grabs your attention and emphasize it, but include something that ids complementary eg a reflection. If you can get the eye to zig-zag throgh an image it's a good thing!


----------



## ZombiesniperJr (Jul 20, 2017)

pendennis said:


> You don't state where the photos were made, and it would be helpful to know a bit more about the locale's geography.


Lake side park thessalon ontario


----------

