Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
That's a really interesting looking tree in good sidelighting, so I can see why it attracted your attention.
Then there are those photogrpahers who set up the camera on a tripod, prefocussed and aimed at the sitter, and move out from behind it so they are face to face with their subject, firing the shutter when they see a good expression. I've seen portraits of photographers where the camera is in view but they're not looking through it. So it's an idea that can work so don't let that stop you.
A nice delicate image you've shot here, in soft lighting which has retained the fine detail.
The interest, visually, is in the middle distance onwards, where the mist is, which is why Tanya's crop produces a stronger image. On another day, where the light is different, or if there were lights visible in the buildings (different time of year perhaps) then I'd leave them in frame. Sometimes it's what you don't include that makes the picture.
I'm afraid I have to agree about there being no subject.
As you shoot RAW, using the corrections in LR is the way to go. I suspect it's a very similar if not basically the same tool as in CS6.
Welcome from me too.
I missed this shot first time around so I went back and looked.
Welcome to epz from me too.
I agree with Tanya. Your weiting is more powerful than your image. This is the place for image critique, where we can help you achieve your message visually.
How much of a crop is this from the original image? We can tell it's a crop as the aspect ratio is not the same as an original frame. If the crop is significant, then this will highlight any imperfections, such as lack of sharpness more so then a smaller crop.
Welcome from me too.
The cropped version is the one I'd go for, as the reduced amount of ceiling makes that element less dominant.
Welcome to the site. I see you've recently joined and this is your first upload.
It's good to see someone capturing some activity the bird is doing rather than a straight portrait shot, though nothing wrong with that.
Welcome back Ishan, it's always good to see your images and read your comments. I hope your exams went well.
Sharpness looks fine to me too, at least at the size on here.
On first looking, this appeared to be about a river bank covered in vegetation. Then I noticed the animals. If they are to be the main subject they need to be more noticeable. Maybe on a wall sized image they would be but you'd need a really sharp clear image to do that. The image here doesn't look crisp - I'm not suggesting the full size original is not sharp, as many factors can affect the lookk of an image on the web, most notably sharpening after resizing and compression.
The image is not crisp for two main reasons. The shutter speed is bordeline for capturing a steady image given the closeness. The normal rules for shutter speed and focal length have to be modified in favour of faster speeds. The second is the small aperture used on a kit zoom lens with tubes, as diffraction starts to come into play.
Willie's mod is more how the image should look, though there's nothing to be done about the white areas that have lost detail through overexposure, especially shooting jpg. Shooting RAW anf you may well have been able to recover some detail.
Meadow cranesbill, or Geranium pratense.