[Rufus]

Zig inspired me, NAY, intimidated me, into trying to improve my manky landscapes.

Here's an effort taken today, 400mm Sigma.

[Zig]

You're very kind to me as usual Rufus.
I remember a saying of David Hockney, where he said something along the lines of "get the edges right and the rest of the picture will follow"; I do like the bottom and left edges and I take my hat off to anyone doing the quantumshift of "thinking in mono".
Only me, but what would you think to cropping down to at least the top of the tree, or even to the upper one of the 2 spiky branches? I'd imagine a different sort of intimacy from this..whaddya think?
Also, just another woolgathering here: that cornfield looks "ripe" enough to bring out its texture and lines. I'm a -thinking of burning in the shadow detail of the main field(omitting the blurring therein), engancing contrast a tad so as to have "black blacks" and "white whites".
Course, that's only how Zig would explore it, and this may be wholly inappropriate..but there are some interesting lines going on in both fields..and as we have by definition an absence of colour(inviting more focus on shape, pattern or texture), I just wonder if it would help the person "walking into" the photo to be enabled by following the direction of the corn lines.
I thought you did a couple of belters the other day at Haresfield..how would they look with the mono treatment, Rufus? Maybe, how would you be if you sent one on the thread here for us to hack about with? Now I've said that, I'm just realising how brave one sometimes has to be when "exposing oneself" thus!

[Banded Drake]

I am by far not " bashing " the picture , just wondering why the blur in the right side of the field? It seems to distract me , maybe thats what you were looking for dunno?
I like the pic other than that ....

[Rufus]

Howzabout this?

[Banded Drake]

LOL now i like it !! Thanks

[Irma]

Yes, Rufus... This is a lot better... I saw that you cropped the bottom part of the picture? My suggestion here would be just to give a little more detail to the tree, if your original allows you... and perhaps in your conversion to B&W give a bit of warm tint...

My comment might be just matter of liking Rufus, because as it is looks very good

[Rufus]

Thanks folks. Yes Irma, I see what you mean. The tree is a bit black, isnt it?

Zig referred to some of the other images, so I just brewed up this one. See what you think.

[Zig]

OK buddy. You have a very strong focal point here, what with rule of thirds an' all..see where the intersection of hedgerows makes a sort of cross just at the wedge of trees on the hillbrow?
Now, taking that as a point the eye wants to go to, I'd assist the eye by getting rid of distarcting detail: foreground highlights for example.
So, I burned highlight detail in foreground to lower contrast, whilst boosting overall contrast.
Then, seeing as the light is directional, giving it a hand by burning in highlights to lower contrast around the L+R edges.
Then, I've burnt in high contrast shadow detail throughout to the horizon, trying to allow the light direction to find its own path au naturel.
Result being that the compositional and light features that were already there, are enhanced, with movement to and from the focal point being freed up somewhat.
That's what I thought anyway: what does this do?

[shuttertalk]

Great stuff ... love your manipulation, Zig - reall came up well. I think it really adds character...

[EnglishBob]

Love the non blurred one Ruf, the shots of the English Countryside are starting to make me homesick! Still, I'm sure 2 weeks of England in November will have me longing to be back in California LOL.

[Rufus]

Blimey Zig! :o

It's all a bit technical for a small Terrier!

It undoubtedly works, though.