In a sense, I suppose, all my micro-landscapes are borrowed, in that I didn't create them, I only found them. Although there is an element of creation in finding the right camera angle for the composition I want (or am forced into), the correct lens, and the camera settings, and the right light, and waiting for nobody else to be screwing up the shot.
I'm still working what exactly a micro-landscape is for me. I do know that it can't be a created scene or diorama that one could hold in the hand. For me it has to be a real place, preferably with living things, and probably some rocks. Water is nice. Complexity in composition is good. A work in progress.
One of the benefits of Linda's membership in the Calgary Horticultural Society is that members sometimes open their gardens for viewing. Some of them are spectacular, to say the least. We visited one such on the weekend. From the street it's a bit of an unusual house, but the garden is in back. Sunken. Hidden. Amazing. And from a micro-landscape perspective, effing spectacular! Pity I had only the one lens. I want to go back.
As I said, my definition of micro-landscape is still evolving. These were taken at the same garden, and I loved the shapes of the wood, and yet I don't think they are a micro-landscape. Maybe that last one is, perhaps. I am undecided. Don't be afraid to tell me what you think in the comments.
12. Do you see the face? Pareidolia strikes again.
Peony of the Day
(July 5, with 14mm, hence the distortions in perspective.)
Driftwood of the Day
I had some composition leeway here. I did not want the pebble to be dead centre, but I also didn't want it to be in one of the rule of thirds spots. I was sort of aiming for a Golden Rectangle placement, but don't have a good intuitive feel for that and totally blew it. In any case there is a bit of shadow towards the upper right and I was also aiming for balance.