The photograph on the left is a stand alone piece. It is quite simple in both presentation and appeal. It offers a depth perspective within it that makes one want to go there.
The one on the right..... First... has a longer exposure time, as the water is completely blurred.... Water, being transparent, is often captured with a longer exposure to make it more visible,whiter, in the image. The whiteness consists of air bubbles... effervescence within a moving stream.... These are not caught on film unless the exposure is lengthened. I personally prefer the randomness of the bubbles, and clarity of the water, the everchanging variations of the living stream showing through ... which requires a shorter exposure. Second... the photo on the right is "flattened" ....most likely by zoom, and less emotional but the vines are very NICE.
While the photo on the right is probably more commercially pleasing... I like the one on the left. It offers MUCH more depth, and a better sense of 'place' than the one on the right. What you see in photo right is what you get, although the vines add a great deal here...... what you see in photo left offers a great deal of detail, as well as a plethora of suggestion that there is more to this place... just outside the frame.... not captured.
Each image stands on it's own I feel. A little larger would be nice, but they appear to have been beautifully captured.
0
B:)liana {K:30945} 10/2/2003
Hm hm...? Very interesting capture of the water and branches, but I wish I can see one in larger format. a little bit heavy composition. but neat images! Kiss, Biliana
Both images one close and one far away create a nice single piece. The movement in the water is perfect. Those branches are very intersting the way they are all tangled together.
0 
{K:4237} 10/3/2003