Lately I have enjoyed scouting some pretty remote locations (relatively speaking) where I wind up following the road until it ends. West Virginia is awesome for revealing broad sweeping vistas that appear in the middle of no where. We found some pretty amazing views when we were there last month.

So on my last scouting trip along the Shenandoah I decided to employee the same approach. GPS is awesome for this - even though I did not spend any time looking at maps before going out on Sunday I was able to use the GPS maps to follow several narrow roads that followed the river. Just as the river started to make a bend the road ended at this great spot to be alone in the woods..

Cheers

A couple of weeks ago my friends Don and Greg got out for a scouting run in the Shenandoah Valley and they brought back some great images. Don had shot a short movie clip of the river and it reminded me of an area where I used to spend weekends doing trail work. So last Sunday I decided to head out that way again and have a look.

Most of the areas that I scouted along the river were pretty muddy but I was motivated by the sun trying to break through the clouds. I did some scouting off of 213 and found some pretty cool views of the river and some old rustic buildings. The farm that I wanted to shoot was not favored by the light so I continued up stream looking for views.

I wound up at this bend in the road and with the impending dusk I decided to stop here to shoot the sunset. The clouds started rolling in just before sunset and occluded the view of the setting sun. I decided to wait it out and was treated to a real show with the clouds lighting up quite a bit. Not the best angle on the scene but some times you have to make do with what you get.

Cheers

The web these days is such a great place to publish work - there are so many great sites that facilitate sharing that, getting your work in front of people is as easy as point and click. The good side of all this is that the work is out there. The down side is that the words we write may be miss interpreted by others who do not know us.

One of the beautiful things about this world is that we are all free to become who we want to be. The end result is a personality that defines who we are. The many factors of our life such as where we live, our parents and their personality traits and the friends that we choose to keep are factored into the final result.

I saw a video today by John Barclay where he was thanking a camera club where he was recently invited to speak. The man who introduced him (whom he had never met other than through the Internet) was able to describe him to a tee as John put it "He came up with the essence of me". It amazes me that that through the information posted online, Ed was able to introduce John and in addition felt like he knew him.

This past weekend I had a similar experience when I met for the first time several of the people that I have met through the community (on FB) at a TME Inspirational workshop. I almost felt like I knew the people and I wanted to ask them how there family was doing and how they have been. Pretty interesting.

The one thing that online posts don't communicate is the tone or context in which something is written. I feel that in written communication (in the context of a stranger) that it is hard to differentiate between humor, jest or dissension. I tend to wear my heart on my sleeve and kid around quite a bit - but in no way do I ever want to sound like I am criticizing or berating someone - that is never my intent.

One of the friends that I met at the workshop is Joe a long time friend of The Mindful Eye. Joe and his wife are great people with great NY personalities that make hanging out fun and interesting. I used this shot of Joe hailing a bus for the blog image because I love his personality and enjoyed hanging out with them.

Cheers

So I am now out of the closet and into the world of camera club critiques (my work that is). Based on the way the image projected (it was a digital submission) I agree with the judges score (a six and a top 10 out of 35). (Wow I never thought I would care where an inage ranked - I don't but I do...)

Out of the box the image did not project very well. I am not trying to defend the image just stating my opinion by looking at the screen and then the monitor. I think it was because I did not soft proof the image using the projector profile and possibly using the wrong color space - I used ProPhoto RGB when I probably should have used sRGB.

The critique went as follows:

• Overall this image looks very sharp most likely shot from a solid tripod.
• There are areas within the image that are not as sharp.
• The darker left edge of the frame (treeline) does not add to the image but does not detract.
• The lower right corner of the image should include more detail - "If you are going to include it in the image then show us something." There is quite a bit of more detail that can be brought out. Here (under the arch of rocks) the photographer brought out more detail.
• Looking at the sky I can not tell if these are stars or perhaps flecks of flying snow. If this is a night image then perhaps these are stars but they could also be flecks of dust on the sensor. Althought with a long exposure then these would blur, so I am not sure. I would remove these in PS.

The theme for the competition was long exposure. I think based on the way the image projected this was a fair assesment of the image. Not knowing the history of this (or any) judge I have no basis for what factors come into play in his decision process. From the print critiques and the other digital image submissions I know that he likes abstracts - but I thought he was fair in his judgement of the more traditional shots. Critiquing someone elses images is a very difficult job at best.

So I survived my first competition and took the first step in the right direction toward finding sources of new information and direction. Beautiful! Thanks to Craig Tanner and Marti Jeffers who continue to encourage people to put there work out there so that we may all grow as artists. Thanks to Glenn Howell for judging the competition. I thought he did a great job. Last but not least thanks to George Favale for our long photography week/weekend and for helping me discover a new way to shoot and explore.

It is funny, I was hoping not to get caught up in the whole rating/competition thing. After all the appeal of an image is very much subjective and varies widely based on ones experiences. I tend to love all photographs and don't yet have the ability to judge one greater than another.

Back to the judging

I see a beautiful image - a nice view of a conk shell on the beach with a nice S curve leading out to beautiful waves and then clouds and the sun rising. I know who's image that is...nice. A 5! What?

OK here's another - well that's just a snap shot of some tire marks in the snow surely that won't do well - a 7??? Hmm, I guess I just don't get it yet. :-)

No worries - thats what I am here for.

Cheers.

P.S.

My last comments were strictly for fun - I am in no way critiquing Glenn's judging of the described images - I thought he did a great job - rather I am pointing out that I am just a beginner who has a lot to learn.