On 11/7/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Check out > http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html > > All comments solicited > > Yeah, nay, and/or otherwise > > What would you do differently? > > Thanks in advance >
now ~that's~ a forest! i love it, ken. under "verdant" in the dictionary, they could put that photo. what i like about it (i fear i won't explain myself well) is that it's what i see when i'm walking in the woods. no attempt to embellish or make anything look majestic. no tree canopies, no beams of light, no fog or mist. the beauty and majesty is there all right, but it's understated: it's the symmetry of those large trunks, it's the lovely green ferns/undergrowth, it's the moss on the old trunks. forests are amazing - i love walking through them, and looking at all the "layers" from the cushioned floor of dead leaves/needles, up. great shot. -frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
