Steps @ Point Lobos

Very rich glowing print! I know its just a scan, but the white sky seems to lack detail and tone. You should never print pure paper white in your prints, it should have just a VERY slight tone below paper white.

I look forward to seeing more of your postings.

Ryan McIntosh

Thanks for your comments Ryan. You're right, the scan does not do the photo justice. The sky is slightly less white than the border.

Nice shot, nicely printed.

Great composition. I agree, IN THIS CASE, that you should burn down that sky a little bit. All the best. Shawn

A beautiful image, good composition and very well done. BTW the sky does need a bit of help.

Charlie..............................

I like this image a lot, kinda reminds me of the style of Kenro Izu in his book 'Sacred places' which is stunning BTW. What lens did you use for this shot 50mm -65mm ? also did you use warmtone developer, print looks warm to me on my monitor, which i do like also.

Very nice. Well composed. Good tonal quality. It's a good one.

Lovely detail - agree that the sky area needs to be pre-flashed or whatever to negate it being quite so strong!

Thanks you all for your comments. Davec101 - I sued a 110 lens and Sprint Developer for the paper. It is a warm look. I like them that way as well. It seems to convey the feeling i had when the negative was made. On the print, the sky is darker than paperwhite. Unfortunately the scanner i have is not that sophisticated, and I did no touch up, it's a straight scan. Again, thanks to all!!

I'm weird, I have been to Point Lobos twice and have no negatives. I kept thinking that every thing I tried looked like Weston did it. I did blow out my knee while walking with 4x5 and zone VI tripod and it was tough just to get back to the parking lot. Someday I'll go again. Your print is nice it documents a place where I've walked. It has a nice twist from top left to bottom right and it has both natural and man made aspects to the subject matter. I would like to know why you felt compeled about the subject to go through the labors of making a print. What am I missing? I have made a lot of prints that I know do not mean much to others while they are very important to me. I'm very analitical and not easily satisfied, I always want to push photography ahead while keeping true to its atributes. I look at 4 aspects when I'm photographing, composition, photographic beauty, will the audience be interested, & a special majic that only a very few amount of prints ever have (see Scott Killian slippery rock creek or my print Green bay cost) your composition is too fragmented, the print is very bueatiful, the subject is only slightly interesting, and the level of majic is low. I don't bother if I only have 1 on the ground glass, 2 aspects is minimum, and 3 if I'm lucky,4 if God helps. This is my Zone system of analizing my photographs.
Good luck, I hope my comments help. Jim O'Neill