
Sorry for such a large file but it looked crap when it was exported any smaller .LOZ
OVERTIME (dial up warning)Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
OVERTIME (dial up warning)Are their any set rules to architecture pic .What rules have I broken with this one
![]() Sorry for such a large file but it looked crap when it was exported any smaller .LOZ
Loz not a bad effort at all. May lack a little contrast and so called 'Pop' factor. The whole picture looks a little muted. Perhaps some experimental PP'ing(curves adjustment might help).
Also maybe a little change to composition to either lift the profile of the reflected building's image in the whole scene by changing position a little to be a little more considerate of the rule of thirds in the positioning of the main building's apex in the whole image and/or the reflected buildings position relative to the whole image. Perhaps different crops of the building to see which works visually the best for different times of the day. I also think trying this shot much closer to dusk when the last vestiges of daylight are fading. This would make dramatic use of the fluro lighting in the building and add a little more separation between building and sky. Hope this makes sense and is of some use? A caveat here though I am definetly no architectural photography expert, I think, neanderthal like would better describe my abilities with architecture. ![]() Great effort though. ![]() cheers marco
Loz
Niceley composed, but I'm with Marco about the reflected building. This adds great interest, but I'd like to have seen more of it (of course this depends on what the stuff we aren't seeing might detract from the shot). Still a great image. Try it in B & W. Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything. *** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
Loz that's looking pretty good and good colour wise as well.
I've included a couple of crops etc (hope you don't mind) but the combinations are endless depending on what you want the image to say or the look you want to achieve(jpeg compression artefacts aside). There are subtle differences in some of these images in terms of cropping and rotation of canvas. Some provide less balance right and left etc. but the key is playing around. I haven't even attempted landscape format crops and truncations but you can experiment to your hearts content also with hue saturation colour, balance, filters etc. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Hell i'm going overboard,sorry, but for what it's worth here is the same photo with a bit of tonal and colour manipulation, don't know what it will look like or what you think but i hope it gives you a quick idea, loz. It's alot of subjective opinion when it all boils down. ![]() ![]() cheers marco
I like the original one better it's more intimate crop and much more simplified allowing for deeper analysis of the geomtric elements, the other ones just show too much nothing special pretty much what you see is what you get 1:1. In the first shot i can see the receeding lines clearly, the cut off lights in the interior and the nice relection at the bottom that grounds the image, I like the way the image is cropped and presented with these 3 elements, any more and the image would be presenting too much.
to improve the first shot iwould just make sure when you frame at least one of the lines meet up in one of the corners, but that's it, the slight tilt and perspective give the shot a unique quality an excellent 1st image.
Loz
I diagree with Wendell. The newer, less cropped version is WAY more interesting since you get the beauty of the other building and its reflection as well. Maybe I'd cut a sliver off the bottom so we don't see that little bit of building in the left. And both B &W and colour work for me. Well done. Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything. *** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
Thanks wendellt ,marcotrov ,cc@t and stubbsy.
Far too often I find myself in strange cities and usually having a couple of hours each end of the day I walk around and enjoy the sights. In this time their is usually very little of interest apart from the surrounding buildings .Since owning my dslr I find it to be a great tool to fill in time and play around at night with the pic that I have taken during the day.. One day maybe their will be a great keeper .These tips that you and others have given will be used to find that once in a life time shot, thanks again .LOZ
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|