<<< o >>>... in ancient times 26 comments + add yours

Like this shot, this one was an attempt to produce a visually simple shot but, as with my previous effort, I'm not sure it's entirely successful. What I do like is the various textures, but I'm not 100% convinced by the compostion. Maybe it's ok ... I'm just not sure.

As always, let me know what you think.

Oh, and this is the last of the auto-posted entries: I'll be back tomorrow.

focal length
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
image quality
RAW converter
1.37pm on 6/6/06
Canon 20D
EF 70-200 f/4L USM
154mm (246mm equiv.)
aperture priority
C1 Pro
2x1 + piers [North pier] + people
comment by Rick at 07:09 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

Seems a little dark. The legs and the boards don't seem to contrast each other. But I do like the texture within the wood.

comment by stian at 07:17 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

Nice texturing. Sharp and crisp. Nice colouring.
Another good one, Dave! ;)

comment by shooter at 07:22 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

I like the angle and the framing, I also like the weathered boards running L to R , I just feel the R heel/foot could do with about .5 to 1 stop more exp, as it seems a little to bright..

comment by Sean at 08:03 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

I agree with shooter. Would have also like to have seen more focus / sharpness on right heel.

Great texture on the boards throughout.

comment by Page at 08:23 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

Not exactly the prettiest feet, but I don't think that was the point. :) I really like the contrast and the use of overall colozation. But I like how the feet aren't perfect, really gives your title meaning.

I have to disagree on the focus though. I like the focus being on the left foot, kind of showing "forwardness" in the shot. (Moving forward.)

comment by david at 08:40 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

the compostion work alright I think - and gives a rather different perspective! cheers :)

comment by Fuzzy at 08:50 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

I think, that this could be even more better without those feet. It would be more simple - just like you want, but still catchy with those nice textures.

comment by marco's light opinion at 08:54 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

Hi Dave, ebout the composition, may be with the feet shifted more to the right the whole effect would have been more dynamic.

Anyway, I like a lot the texture, and also the toning produce a suggestive effect.

comment by Sean at 09:10 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

Page - not to be semantical, but as the right foot is beginning it's next stride - wouldn't the left foot be left (pun-intended) behind?

comment by nuno f at 09:52 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

Not one of your best shots, David. But still like the composition and tone and the textures of the wood.

comment by JD at 09:54 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

I like feet shots, and your previos one was quite splendid (im posh today...), but this one doesn't really cut the mustard.
i think its something to do with the right hand side of the image and the lack of sharpness causing an imbalance?

the shadow and the crispness of the flat foot is great, so in conclusion one think that a tighter crop to that region might have benefitted this photomgraph

comment by Trish at 10:53 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

This may sound weird, but I actually *feel* that if the right foot was forward, it would have been a better shot. Something about the weightiness on that side of the picture. But I love the detail in the wood.

comment by Lex at 11:02 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

Another competent and interesting shot, as always. For photoblogging, this and the last few are well within the bounds of acceptability; I'd still like you to explore more of your ideas based project work, when you have the time.

comment by Mark at 11:25 PM (GMT) on 20 June, 2006

Lex - "For photoblogging, this and the last few are well within the bounds of acceptability"...

WTF is that supposed to mean?? I'm so glad you've posted that, I'm sure the whole photoblogging world will be sleeping more soundly tonight knowing where the 'acceptable boundaries' of our work exist!...and for that I bow down and give thanks to thee..

Dave - not sure what it is you're after but I also think you're asking the wrong audience. Given the level you're at and the nature of the whole thing in general then only you can say what it is that's not quite right about this. Is the subjective opinion of others really going to assist you in looking at this shot in a different way...truly?

But then, hey...Lex says it's acceptable. So you must be onto something ;-)

comment by PlasticTV at 04:43 AM (GMT) on 21 June, 2006

Yes, the toning and texture in the wooden floor make this picture very pleasing to the eye. The reverse L shape that the guy's legs and his shadow made also cut the entire frame in a very settling proportion.

comment by Karl Baumann at 07:36 AM (GMT) on 21 June, 2006

Lovely wood texture and the tone is nice as well :-)

comment by Terri at 09:03 AM (GMT) on 21 June, 2006

Humm, the thought that springs to mind is "how the hell did you take that shot without upsetting someone" - lol

I don't comment much, I'm one of the ghosting vistors, however, I visit daily and I thoroughly enjoy your site

Take care

comment by Sysagent at 10:02 AM (GMT) on 21 June, 2006

Like the colouring to the whole image and the detail and patterning of the wood in the image, I can't really see much wrong with it to be honest.

comment by navin harish at 10:33 AM (GMT) on 21 June, 2006

Great shot. The post processing have has enhanced the appeal of this shot.

comment by El Jefe at 02:45 PM (GMT) on 21 June, 2006

It´s ok.

comment by david mantripp at 04:05 PM (GMT) on 21 June, 2006

Well this is the first time I've visited here...

I'm very impressed with this photo, especially if it was a grab shot. The dynamics are perfect, even the cut of the planks helps (the horizontal cut, and lack thereof in the one below the right foot). I also agree that the focus on the left foot is the best choice.

Surely destined to grace to some corporate annual-mission-statement-report somewhere ?

comment by djn1 at 09:00 PM (GMT) on 21 June, 2006

Thanks everyone.

Mark: I think, probably, that Lex's point was that photoblogs aren't galleries; i.e. they often contain shots that are as much a work in progress as anything else (or maybe the shots are representative of ideas in progress). In other words, I wouldn't always claim that a shot was the best I could do, nor that they're always successful: hence my request for comments.

comment by Mark at 08:14 AM (GMT) on 22 June, 2006

djn - hmm...maybe, maybe not. I guess only Lex could say for certain. However, suggesting what a photoblog either IS or ISN'T, using such language as 'within the bounds of acceptability' sounds haughtily conceited to me. Of course, Lex, I apologise if this wasn't the case...I think you know where I am if you want to comment further :-)

As for my point to you regarding asking for comments. Well...I'll retract that for now as it really opens up the question of how we view the commenting on photoblogs and what it is we actually get, or seek to get, from them.

Cheers, Mark :-)

comment by Paul Courtney at 01:42 PM (GMT) on 23 June, 2006

Hi Dave,
Not sure if you've seen this site, but this shot (http://www.dianevarner.com/index.php) reminded me of yours.

comment by Donostia at 02:16 PM (GMT) on 30 June, 2006

Great Scene, beautiful postprocess

comment by dave at 08:48 PM (GMT) on 9 July, 2006

Your photos are great.

I use pics like these on my blog, which is actually all about relieving back, neck and shoulder pain.

Are yours copyrighted or could one or more be used on a content-rich site where there are Google ads, but nothing is sold by my site?

thanks dave