I'm rubbish at taking photos

[Dec66]

I've looked and looked and I can't see your beer anywhere..... FAIL!

Here's a picture of the lunch I had later on that day in Venasque.

No beer, but a cheeky little vin du maison.

The food, incidentally, was magical.

 

[I like Skol]

That's better. True artistry.....

 

[Dayvo]

I was expecting to see fingers or a thumb, but it looks very good.

I did think it was a bog brush at first, though.

 

[MichaelW2]

There's a 'rule' of one third/two thirds when it comes to skies and landscapes - in other words, the pic might look a little better with a touch more sky in it.

I'd have panned left or right a bit to decentralise the houses in the distance.

The "rule" for a classically proportioned image can be helpfully discarded with more unusual subjects, esp ones with a more abstract subject matter, such as "lots of purple".
Panning (rotating the camera on its vertical axis, from side to side) to remove the house may have worked, unless the field edges became visible.

 

[Milkfloat]

I don't have any decent editing tools on my current device, but what about?

 

[Biker Joe]

I don't have any decent editing tools on my current device, but what about?
View attachment 417513

I prefer the original one. It shows more perspective and is more interesting.

 

[I like Skol]

I prefer the original one. It shows more perspective and is more interesting.

I agree. The house itself is quite ordinary, but it's place in the surroundings is the point of interest in that photo, IMHE.

 

[Dec66]

That's better. True artistry.....

Just found that one, taken in Avignon a couple of days before.

Composition: rubbish.
Exposure: rubbish.
Focus: rubbish.
Subject matter: big, cold and wet. And tasty. Thumbs up was there to provide scale (it's a "Formidable", apparently).

 

[Globalti]

I'd have taken it in portrait with the lavender taking up 2/3 or 3/4 of the shot. Then I'd have moved from side to side in order to maximise the impact of the bare earth in leading the eye towards the houses and the lavender plants in framing that. Having the detail in the foreground then the lavender plants leading the eye away would emphasis the remoteness of the farm and the size of the field.

The joy of digital is that you can take a load of pictures then sit quietly later deleting the ones you don't like. If you took a dozen shots from different viewpoints you would find one that worked perfectly.

 

[postman]

guess it looks better when blown up to 20" x 16".

I read that as we could blow up 25 x 26

 

[annedonnelly]

I bet the smell of the lavender was wonderful. Was it full of bees?

 

[MichaelW2]

Using photoshop, you could replace the house with a glass of beer. Everyone's a winner.

 

[I like Skol]

I just realised, there's no beer, no food and no bikes. Just why did the OP take that picture?

 

[dantheman]

View attachment 417507

Here's a picture of the lunch I had later on that day in Venasque.

No beer, but a cheeky little vin du maison.

The food, incidentally, was magical.

Damn that's a good picture, I'm so jealous..

 

[Cycleops]

You might find the "two thirds" rule useful when composing or editing your pictures;
https://digital-photography-school.com/rule-of-thirds/
That's part of the reason why @Milkfloat 's reworked edition of your pic is better on the eye.

What did you take it on?