Which do you prefer?
Which do you prefer?
This shot last week:
or this shot today of the same path:
 225 mm, f/13, 1/20 sec, +1 stop EC, ISO 100 |
 140 mm, f/14, 0.3 sec., +1.6 stop EC, ISO100 |
First one, but only because it looks rather mystical. But they’re both good.
Yes, first one, I think. There are nicer branches hanging in the foreground and it’s paler and silvery. Plus it’s got the little red birds - like a little bonus extra.
Gotta say, I like the first one better, and so do the 3 other people I’ve shown it to - they seem to think it is a little sharper, and like the color balance on it.
I like the first one. In the second, the darker more stand out green grass takes away from the path’s branches.
I like the first one better cause of the little birdy and because of the tint of blue in the background/grey. It just seems more pleasent to me. And there is more white than grey in the first one which makes it more pleasent and pretty.
Definitely the first one.
the first one!
Thanks for all the feedback. It’s funny, but I posed the same question on a forum of photographers and they *all* said the second one (which is more technically accurate) where as the general consensus amongst non-photographers is the first one. I guess it goes to show that sometimes it’s good to disconnect yourself from the nitpicky details of getting ‘that perfect shot’ and just go with what feels right.
I wish you hadn’t’ve told us that, because I was coming here to tell you that I prefer the second one by far...more aesthetically pleasing to me for some reason.
Now I look like a buttkisser.
A little late to the game here, but in the first one, I like the way the eye is led to the point in the forest where the path leads… very mysterious. The second one, the grass is greener and the trees along the path are more striking, but the distant turn in the path is dimmer and less foggy, so it’s a prettier picture, but less captivating.
Post a comment