Nice to see something so different, and I like the lo-fi qualities of the image. But I don't really get it...

Hi guys, thanks for the comments and i'm very proud this photo got featured. Thanks for that! Before i answer the questions above, i'd like to say that there's something which I don't understand: sometimes the first or second commenter asks the (anonymous) photographer for info or comment. But if i would answer and comment, the whole WeeklyShot.org-philosophy of giving people (the viewer als well as the photographer) the chance for unbiased rating and commenting will be gone, or am i seeing this the wrong way?
Anyway, about my picture(s) which i post here on WeeklyShot.org: normally i don't like to comment myself or give explanations on the content or view. (People asking me for technical help always receive feedback from me, this is absolutely no problem). But in this case, i'll try to give some background info... people who know me, will agree that i like my pictures to be a little unrealistic, a bit surreal, often a little darker or moody. Surely i'm not the only one doing this kind of stuff(!) :-), but on weeklyshot.org, i often get comments of viewers "not understanding the photo" or "finding it strange or weird". I wonder why, i really cannot explain this.. :-)
Anyway, i like this site very much, and i'll keep posting pictures as much as i can, and i'm truly very proud to have yet another picture featured.

Oh yeah, i forgot.. about this particular shot: the left and right one are as you see the landscape in real life: to the left you see the water and to the right the little road. Although there's only one sign i shot it from two different angles. The landscape and horizon are almost as they are, but because the sign is repeated and replaced, it makes the diptych a little surreal, it confuses the viewer a little at first. And this surreal feeling is made stronger by the processing (the texture and the light). Of course, all this doesn't *have* to matter. You can look at this diptych in an esthetical way. When i look at pictures, very often i just enjoy the light, the contrast, the textures, the lines, the composition without caring much about the content or 'the meaning'. Am i making sense here? :-)

Perfect sense. I agree about enjoying the light, the contrast, the textures, the lines, the composition without caring much about the content or the "the meaning."

Don't get me wrong - I like the image, and all the more after this discussion. First impressions from the composition suggest that the photographer is trying to say something deeper, but in the context of your replies I can see that the unusual composition can be just another way of making an interesting photo.

I'm off to dig around your website for some inspiration. Keep doing things differently!

BTW while an image can be rated, all comments are hidden until the viewer has submitted their rating. So you can respond to comments without compromising your anonimity.

Okay Duncmc, i didn't know that.. so when i comment -being the photographer-, only the people who already submitted comment can see my writing and identity, not the others, i see, right,.. that makes sense.. thanks for the info :-)

This is really quite good! It makes perfect sense as a diptych - not only do the water and the road converge, the progression of the trees on the left mirror the power line on the right.

You should be very proud.

A typical KVDV shot with the same great processing as always. I don't think the diptych was needed but it adds a little more 'weirdness' to the shot.

kvdv says: "very often i just enjoy the light, the contrast, the textures, the lines, the composition without caring much about the content or 'the meaning'. Am i making sense here? :-)"

Yes kvdv, you are definitely making sense. Often, those things can be enough to make a spectacular image on their own.