# Lake Manitoba (and a bonus photo)



## invisible (Aug 4, 2011)

I scouted this location about 6 hours before the light conditions were right for the photo I wanted to make. Then I returned to the scene later and made the exact photo I wanted...








...but while I was preparing my gear the sun was setting and I got this unexpected bonus image (a bit cluttered, mind you, but what a view!). It was one of the most beautiful sunsets I've ever seen. No HDR or other gimmicks here, and no extra saturation  in fact, I had to DE-saturate the image in post... Shot with a GND filter and a ND filter stacked.






Hope no one gets offended for the colour image on this B&W forum  Thanks for looking...


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 4, 2011)

That second one is wicked!

I :heart: the first one more. 

I am questioning your crop a little. 
I think it works as is, but I also think it works cropping just under the white streak in the top.


But I still :heart: it!  Just playing with comp.


----------



## tron (Aug 5, 2011)

first one is incredible, i must have come back to this thread 3-4 times just to stare at it.  how long was your exposure time?


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 5, 2011)

Wicked...both of them.


----------



## Moiz (Aug 5, 2011)

First one too good!


----------



## johnh2005 (Aug 5, 2011)

Wow, you could not have gotten a better shot.  That water was just incredible.  The reflections are perfect.  Awesome job.  I love them both!


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Aug 5, 2011)

When I think you cannot surprise me anymore, you come and smack me upside the head with a 2x4. Wow. Just WOW!

That photo is just beautiful.

Now, no C&C. You didn't ask for it and you sure don't need it anyway. But I do want to tell you what I would have done with it just to see what you think of it and, maybe, if you care to explain your own vision, why you did what you did. From your text it is obvious you carefully thought out the image and took the time needed to get it. May a bunch of newbies read and understand it...

So, no, no C&C but a want to understand why you framed the way you did so that if it tickles my soul, I can steal something from you. 

Ok, here it goes. The horizon line is so beautiful I would have put it dead center to get a perfect (bottom) half of action vs. a perfect (top) half of zen nothing. And yes, I am dead serious.

Yin and Yang kind of thing, you know. Very clear but far from perfect. Maybe you need to be Leonard Cohen to understand what I'm saying. Lol.



As far as the bonus shot is concerned, unfortunately it is the bonus shot and it just can't compete with the first one. Maybe if I had seen it first but sure as hell not after seeing the first one. Kind of like a B-side.


----------



## invisible (Aug 5, 2011)

tron said:


> first one is incredible, i must have come back to  this thread 3-4 times just to stare at it.  how long was your exposure  time?


Thank you, tron! Exposure time was 90 seconds for #1 and 30 seconds for #2.



c.cloudwalker said:


> When I think you cannot surprise me anymore, you come and smack me upside the head with a 2x4. Wow. Just WOW!
> 
> That photo is just beautiful.
> 
> ...


Thank you so much for your kind feedback, I sincerely appreciate it. For a while I had wanted to make a shot of a pier, jetty, or anything similar floating near the shore of one of the lakes around here. The plan was (and, as you will soon read why, still is) to shoot such subject using a long exposure to smooth the water, and then find an overcast sky (not a sky with clouds but a fully overcast one) so it would naturally merge around the horizon with the water. I wanted the water to become one with the sky in the background, allowing the "merge" to create different tones of gray, for a scene somewhat ethereal, almost abstract. When I found this pier (decorated with those four foreground sticks, no less!) I was annoyed to see that the horizon line was "ruined" by those bushes on the other side of the lake. (These area is known as "The Narrows"  the narrowest part of this huge lake.) I made the shot regardless, and I liked the results, but I'm still looking to make that "horizon-less" photo I was describing above.

If you take a look at the colour image, you'll see that there were trees on both sides of the floating pier, which kind of limited to a certain degree my composition options. But what dictated this crop was the lighter streak in the sky  if I included the portion of the sky above it, that portion seemed useless (because basically the white streak guides your eye from the end of the pier to the top-right edge of the frame and then out).

That being said, I could have cropped the image in a few different ways. (Case in point: see Bitter Jeweler's quote below.) To place the horizon dead smack in the middle, with the sky cropped as you see here (which was the only acceptable option I found due to the white streak) would've meant compromising the black sticks (or their shadows) in the lower portion of the photo.

I hope this rant satisfies your curiosity 



Bitter Jeweler said:


> I am questioning your crop a little.
> I think it works as is, but I also think it works cropping just under the white streak in the top.


I agree, Bitter. I just liked this crop better at the time, but would've been happy with your suggested crop as well. 

Thanks everybody for your kind feedback, glad you enjoyed these!

I'm giving away three free 12x18 prints on my Facebook page. Feel free to join and enter the giveaway.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 5, 2011)

I too, appreciate your explanation. I like the concept you are going for, and I hope you find it.Even though this wasn't exactly what you wanted, I like the black line.


----------



## Trever1t (Aug 5, 2011)

there is nothing like making a plan and have it executed with near perfection. Good work man!


----------



## BlackSheep (Aug 6, 2011)

Wonderful shots, both of them!


----------



## invisible (Aug 6, 2011)

Thank you, guys!


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 6, 2011)

The first one is absolutely awesome.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Aug 7, 2011)

Thanks for the explanation. I did wonder whether my idea was even possible because I agree that I would not want the poles/sticks any closer to the lower edge of the frame.


----------



## sleist (Aug 7, 2011)

Love #1 - reminds me of Michael Kenna's work.
Well done.


----------



## joealcantar (Aug 7, 2011)

Cool shots but favoring #1.
-
Shoot well and thanks for sharing, Joe


----------



## useakme (Aug 7, 2011)

Love both of them - great shots. I'm from Winnipeg myself, and after seeing these I just might have to take a drive north! Thanks for sharing your photos


----------



## invisible (Aug 9, 2011)

Thanks all for taking a look and commenting!


----------



## ToMaNyToYsJf (Aug 9, 2011)

i love looking at your stuff  great job on both photos. your stuff is alway inspiring


----------



## invisible (Aug 9, 2011)

ToMaNyToYsJf said:


> i love looking at your stuff  great job on both photos. your stuff is alway inspiring


  Thanks for your kind words and glad that you liked these!


----------

