Mick Hazelgrove wrote:

> Hi All
>
> See I do listen to your comments. I've modified the mountains, the water and
> added a sky. Still alot to add
> the pic will be vaguely based on the celtic lord of the hunt myth.
>
> Mick
>

Well...now we know how high the bar is ...
That far peak is gorgeous, it's tactility is enough to carry the slightly
abstract sky adding drama behind it.  Then my eye catches the monolith that
echoes it on the foreground hill, with the highly tactile grass, and I follow
the grass down the hill, it's sweep to be coralled by the leaping stag and swung
back into the center.  But then,...some confusion,...a nexus of crisscrossing
diagonals reach to the picture edges flattening the composition,...sets of
parrallel monoliths seem to trace a path into the distance and re-establish
depth, but I've grown confused.  I keep going to the stag and I remember my art
history lessons about having something to lead the eye in from a lower
corner...but it is not the most pleasing of results.  I think it's those
parallel monoliths in the foreground.  The stag is fighting them too hard to get
depth.  They line up on the picture plane and even echo two parallel peaks in
the distance range on the horizon causing a flattening effect.  Along with the
same parallel stones in the middle distance and their reflection in the water.
Then one notices how the line of the middle distance hill follows across to the
line of the right hand hill where it is relected in the water ending at the
stags feet.  The real brow of that right-hand hill follows through to pick up
the base of the vertical monolith, its shadow and eventually a string of stones
to the lower left corner.  I loose my sense of where the stag is relative to the
vertical monoliths in the foreground.  Perhaps if their rigid adhering to the
picture plane could be confused somehow?  Anyway the sophisticated stuff you
have going on in this picture invites analysis and supposition, and I guess
that's what it is really all about.

-Jim

Post a reply to this message