getting a better landscape Silhouette

[Muhammad Ali]

Hi everybody,

I love Silhouettes and I wonder why this one does not look good. is it because of the so clustered objects? could the sky colors look better and how?


Picture was taken using Nikon D-7000 with a Nikkor 18-105mm lens at sunset

Exif data
X-Resolution 300 dpi
Y-Resolution 300 dpi
Orientation Horizontal (normal)
Software ViewNX 2.0 W
Date and Time (Modified) 2011:08:14 01:40:18
YCbCr Positioning Centered
Color Space Uncalibrated

DSC_1281 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[crockny]

I think there's too much blank sky -- maybe if you cropped the little clump of trees on the left and some of the top of the sky it would work better -- worth a try!

[danbaileyphoto]

Exposure is good, but I think you don't have enough interesting subject matter in the frame. There's nothing for the viewer's eye to play off of when they look at the trees. There's really nowhere for them to go, so it doesn't hold interest. I think it needs a definable second element to create balance.

[Krusty79]

FYI, when they ask for exif data, they mean your ISO, shutter speed and aperture primarily.

I don't think a group of trees works well for a silhouette. A single tree will give you a much cleaner silhouette. The group looks too cluttered IMO.

The sky looks pretty noisy. Have you enlarged this image or increased the saturation?

[Muhammad Ali]

Originally Posted by Krusty79

FYI, when they ask for exif data, they mean your ISO, shutter speed and aperture primarily.

I don't think a group of trees works well for a silhouette. A single tree will give you a much cleaner silhouette. The group looks too cluttered IMO.

The sky looks pretty noisy. Have you enlarged this image or increased the saturation?

Thanks for your comment. Yeah I know about the exif data but I uploaded the picture dirctly from my flicker account using my work office PC which did not have the original picture with the right exif data. the exif data I had in my thread was taken from flicker as well. As you said, a one tree could be a better starting point for a silhouette.

No I did not enlarge the image or increase the saturation.

[Muhammad Ali]

Originally Posted by danbaileyphoto

Exposure is good, but I think you don't have enough interesting subject matter in the frame. There's nothing for the viewer's eye to play off of when they look at the trees. There's really nowhere for them to go, so it doesn't hold interest. I think it needs a definable second element to create balance.

Thanks for your critique. Actually, I was trying to make the viewer catch the special moment of the sunset while the sun was going down behind the trees but I ended up with so many distractions. a definable second element as you just said would make it meaningful.

[Muhammad Ali]

Originally Posted by crockny

I think there's too much blank sky -- maybe if you cropped the little clump of trees on the left and some of the top of the sky it would work better -- worth a try!

.

Thanks for the good ideas, it defiantly works better.

[Krusty79]

Originally Posted by Muhammad Ali

Thanks for your comment. Yeah I know about the exif data but I uploaded the picture dirctly from my flicker account using my work office PC which did not have the original picture with the right exif data. the exif data I had in my thread was taken from flicker as well. As you said, a one tree could be a better starting point for a silhouette.

No I did not enlarge the image or increase the saturation.

Your sky looks kind of noisy, so that's why I asked. I wonder if your ISO was at a high setting.

You have some spots in your shot also, so you may need to clean your sensor.

[Muhammad Ali]

Originally Posted by Krusty79

Your sky looks kind of noisy, so that's why I asked. I wonder if your ISO was at a high setting.

You have some spots in your shot also, so you may need to clean your sensor.

the iso was set at 125 but the spots might have been caused by some dust on the lens glass. Thanks anyway