|
|
|
Leutrim Haliti
{K:181} 3/25/2008
|
Urimet e mija per kete fotot te bukur Visar,cdo te mire !
|
|
|
|
|
Jen van Wijn
{K:17127} 3/25/2008
|
Think its also a masterpiece you captured;) Well done! Jen
|
|
|
|
|
Alida Santarelli
{K:12513} 3/25/2008
|
Bellissima immgaine, complimenti!
|
|
|
|
1301307 60
{K:40695} 3/26/2008
|
The clouds is slowly enveloping the mountain with mist, beautiful scene Visar.. The light rays seen is like the source of all this fog that is flowing down...
very good capture.. moody!
regards..
|
|
|
|
|
Burim Luta
{K:6000} 3/26/2008
|
WOW, great shot dude with great mystic atmosphere.
I just love Rugova Canyon and is what I would call it
"Kosovo's Valhalla"
Regards
B.L.
|
|
|
|
|
John Hatz
{K:138564} 3/26/2008
|
Excellent shot, well the way that the clouds 'hug' the mountain makes that photo really dramatic, plus the greyscale and the contrast that adds on that fealling... well for me, dramatic photos are the best!
best regards!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 3/27/2008
|
Definitely some great dramatic moment on this image, Visar, but somehow it doesn't want to clarify the impression of that masterwork to me. There is detail on the trees, tension on the fog/clouds, and also absorbing light games, but still all of the components are there in some weaker way than I think that they could be. Perhaps too much of everything, or perhaps too low contrast between the the elements of the image - I can't really say.
Any more shots from there?
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
visar sherifi
{K:16905} 3/27/2008
|
hmm, so you got high standards for masterworks ey!? ;)
of course, the objective is very limited in capturing all the beauty there is that the eye can meet!! then, of course i cannot justify myself in failing to bring the captivating beauty of the canyon!!
i have been there many many times, but never liked any picture i made, or any other picture made by anyone there that much as to portray this masterpiece! really; perhaps it is because of the way it is situated or i do not know what... but certainly there is something about it.
but what i can say is that the technical equipment i used to realise this shot is pretty sophisticated. that for sure. but... but!!
anyways, i have some other pictures from the same day, but i think this one, to my taste, is the best. thus, i do not think i will be posting anymore of these landscapes.
thanks for the straight feeling about it Nick, i highly apprichiate that.
cheers,
v.
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 3/28/2008
|
It is generally much harder to get some image that really conveys the grandiosity of some landscape, Viar! Most times we shot almost in vain, and then some day we just get it. I still try to get some images of landscapes right but... with no success whatsoever up to now.
I guess that in general the wide angles fit very well for such jobs, and you did use such a lens. But the reference to the depth that such a lens creates is very weak here and the landscape seems to be so... partial. And I don't have a single clue why. Did the clouds prevent that? Or perhaps the fact that there is no sky as a background? It just had to be different. Any ideas anybody?
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
visar sherifi
{K:16905} 3/28/2008
|
yes, could be the clouds in preventing the deepest depth! but not quite often i give chance to depths of shots Nick, maybe you realised that?! that is because i limit the frame, i do create natural frames most of the times; that way i feel i am more in control of whatever there is within the canvas- and it is neater, some sort of order where things, i assume, interact more precisely; rather then having many elements that could easily get out of hand. of course, it is a matter of experience- confidence too! but then, things come in time, at times, i guess!!
v.
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 3/29/2008
|
Oh wait! You do exactly as well with depth if you want that, Visar! I'll only mention "head on", "to the unknown", and "caging my sky" here. And of course the difficulties geht more and more as we include more and more things in the frame of the landscape. But it pays back.
As an example I attach an image with three awarded images from National Geographic this year. Those on the left side are the originals and those on the right side I just cutted from he originals (as hints about a closer zoom with "less things"). The grandiosity is on the left side.
And for a better view of the original images on the left I send them attached in the next 3 messages, as only one attachment per message can be made. I think we all should see them. It is readily visible that these great landscape images would be much weaker in grandiosity if that depth wasn't present.
Cheers!
Nick
|
Depth vs. no depth |
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 3/29/2008
|
First image:
Make a closer approach and the Aurora Borealis goes down to Broadway lights...
|
Taken from National Geographic (All copyright laws active here!) |
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 3/29/2008
|
And if we get a close-up of some rocks only, could that ever make the same impression?
|
Taken from National Geographic (All copyright laws active here!) |
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 3/29/2008
|
Not to speak about what this one would be, as a landscape image, if we would include only some few instruments of that unrepeatable orchestra. The power of the symphony would be reduced to some few melodies.
With all kind excuses for additionally used band width.
Nick
|
Taken from National Geographic (All copyright laws active here!) |
|
|
|
|
visar sherifi
{K:16905} 4/2/2008
|
hey Nick,
Absolutely. there's no way that you would have the same impression if you would get a closer shot to the rocks. In addition, my personal prefernce is the foreground- this variety of form and content.
But, Nick, somewhat these picture you attached are so beautifully worked out that i amost find them disturbing!! isn't that strange??!
cheers,
v.
|
|
|
|
|
visar sherifi
{K:16905} 4/2/2008
|
no way. the way it is cropped has given character and power of expression to the subjects, mainly rocks- whose wild beauty is complemented with the other elements- thunder, wall-rock formation and the opened sea and sky..
thanks for sharing it with me Nick,
v.
|
|
|
|
|
visar sherifi
{K:16905} 4/2/2008
|
no comment!! a 'braoder'-way than broadway! ravishing.
regards,
v.
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 4/3/2008
|
Well, the images are simply professional, Visar. They convey grandiosity to the maximum possible degree, and that kind of "disturbing" you mentioned might also be the result of the (almost) direct view of a physical scene through an image.
Many times this irritation is the best hint about the strength of the photo. The astonishment gets amplified by the fact that we look at that grandious scene that was so huge and full of great details through a much smaller image - and that downscaling that still preserves grandiosity is also strange to our eyes.
Much like the "irritation" that is caused from many of your images that show rather "inner landscapes". I find that very intriguing.
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 4/3/2008
|
So, you prefer the close-up-like crop, Visar? Sorry, I didn't understand. :-/
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 4/3/2008
|
Yes! You found exactly the word I was looking for, Visar! Ravishing indeed!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
visar sherifi
{K:16905} 4/3/2008
|
hehe... no no, i was only answering to your question on the attachment- "And if we get a close-up of some rocks only, could that ever make the same impression?".
it is that i see the image is cropped, before you cropped it for comparison. so, i was referring to the original crop that is emphesising all the natural phenomena so beautifully.
that's that,
cheers,
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:85750} 4/4/2008
|
Thanks a lot for the clarifictaion, Visar!
The original image, as far as I know, was not cropped but rather stiched together from two photos. That guy did an excellent job considering uniform lighting, which can be extremelly hard to achieve in such panoramic images due to the usual extreme light differences in natural scenes. Nature can be so hard to get right, but if one manages to do that then the resulting images are stunning, really. So, I'd rather place the photography of nature under the most demanding chapters for advanced photography. Which I guess most of us still don't really see this way. But it has also its great benefits for all of us to deal with such photography right from the start, as it always is a hard problem to solve, which of course sharpens our view/mind. And so we keep on trying.
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
