My beloved Crimea, although it's completely filthy, pardon the expression, but unfortunately that's how it is. The author even has a little bottle in the foreground it needed cleaning, and the artificial concrete blocks with rings don't improve the picture either; they could have been replaced with stones.
Yakov Trembovolsky, thank you. Something similar was said elsewhere. Personally, my "view wanders from the cliff down the pebbles to the right edge, transitioning to the upper shoreline and returning along it or the clouds (adds dynamics) to the cliff. The right edge is undecided; it would have been worthwhile to close the shoreline, but the view there wasn't great." But this is more my personal bias. An outside perspective is interesting.
It's clear that if there are many objects in the foreground and background, then a viewing trajectory will be found.
But we're talking about the balance of objects in the frame, or the correct imbalance, if we're talking about an artistic image.
If it's a document, just a fact, that's a different matter.
In Japan, I was amazed by how precisely, subtly, and thoughtfully they arranged stones in space ("rock gardens").
It's the same with a photographer: he can't remove stones from the frame (unless he's a radical photographer), but when he shoots and frames, it's always his choice.
ash, no, of course not, and I wrote about imbalance (chaos) too, but angles can be different, direct and indirect, objective and subjective, depth of field, sharpness/blur, specific framing:
You know this better than me.
I would also crop the right side with this option: View crop
The concrete and ironwork on the p.p. somewhat detract from the elegiac mood, but it's beautifully shot - textured, three-dimensional, with a vibrant sky.
Yes, I agree 200% about the filth, the views are nice. But when you remember that next to it there is practically a garbage dump... Although there are places that are not so run-down.
Here's an independent work: View crop
It's clear that if there are many objects in the foreground and background, then a viewing trajectory will be found.
But we're talking about the balance of objects in the frame, or the correct imbalance, if we're talking about an artistic image.
If it's a document, just a fact, that's a different matter.
In Japan, I was amazed by how precisely, subtly, and thoughtfully they arranged stones in space ("rock gardens").
It's the same with a photographer: he can't remove stones from the frame (unless he's a radical photographer), but when he shoots and frames, it's always his choice.
depth of field, sharpness/blur, specific framing:
You know this better than me.
I would also crop the right side with this option: View crop
This is an endless conversation. )))
Sergey Tigarev, it's already highlighted, any further is too much