Critique
I try to think critically about my photography, but getting an outside perspective is always helpful. Thankfully, as a member of Gavin Hardcastle’s Patreon, I’m able to submit images for critique. I submitted one of my Joshua Tree shots for feedback this month and received some invaluable notes.
When I emailed Gavin, I said, “I’ve always felt there was one glaring issue with this image, but I’m curious if you react to the same thing or have other feedback.” I was referring to the empty space in the top-left of the frame. It was a beautiful blue sky day, but blue skies aren’t usually conducive to great landscape images. Empty space itself doesn’t bother me; I like clean, graphic compositions. But, in this situation, the composition wasn’t balanced.
Thankfully, Gavin said some lovely things about the image, including, “Really good shot, perfectly executed. Super sharp. Nice composition. I like the black and white, too, so good call on that.” He also liked how I’d positioned myself at the right height to create separation between the tree branches and the line of the mountains. I’m happy to say that was intentional. However, his attention was drawn to the bottom left-hand foreground.
“If you look at the composition, I feel like this [foreground brush and shadow] is completely unnecessary. There’s really no need for this to exist … If it would have been possible, it would have been nice to have just got the Joshua tree and that lovely shadow, which is really creeping towards the camera and gives it a sense of impact. But not have this in because it just doesn’t help us in any way.”
It was really interesting to hear this perspective because I liked that part of the image. I felt like it helped to extend the radial burst that began with the sun star and through the branches of the tree. However, it was a valid comment because that detail contributes to the imbalance in the image. In a way, I suspect we were both identifying the same problem—the imbalance—but for different reasons.
Gavin suggested cloning the whole mound out of the image to solve the problem. Conversely, my instinct was to try a sky replacement to add more detail in the top-left. Ultimately, though, I don’t feel particularly comfortable with either option. Usually, I’m happy to make tweaks and edits that contribute to a stronger image, but the image means something to me because it was a real moment I experienced. Each idea changes the scene too far from reality. I guess there’s a vaguely defined line I don’t want to cross if I want the image to hold meaning.
Overall, the critique was really constructive because it gave me a different perspective on the image and forced me to think about what I care about in my shots. I thought it would be interesting to compare the original image with a version that removed the mound and a version with a sky replacement. The results were a fun experiment, but ultimately, the real lesson is to work harder on creating balanced compositions at the outset.
If you’re interested in seeing more of Gavin’s work, check out his Fototripper channel on YouTube, and his excellent book Stories within Stories.
Image with sky replacement
Image with foreground details removed
Original image
