Outside the Royal Hotel

[William Walker]

A departure from what I normally post...it would interesting to hear what you think.

Thanks
William

[RSL]

Grand stuff, William. If I didn't know better I'd suspect it's Walker Evans.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

The scene is lovely.

It is the post processing that bothers me. Blocked shadows in the bushes, and the car front (supposedly in the same deep shadow too) lightened up too much, with a halo between it and the wall, resulting in a cutout feel. Also, the lightest and most contrasty part of the image is at the extreme left edge, distracting from the main subject - resolved simply by cropping.

[GrahamBy]

I was willing to accept that as rim-lighting from the headlights of another car out of frame to the left...

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I was willing to accept that as rim-lighting from the headlights of another car out of frame to the left...

I did not question that, but the car front lighting.

[William Walker]

The scene is lovely.

It is the post processing that bothers me. Blocked shadows in the bushes, and the car front (supposedly in the same deep shadow too) lightened up too much, with a halo between it and the wall, resulting in a cutout feel. Also, the lightest and most contrasty part of the image is at the extreme left edge, distracting from the main subject - resolved simply by cropping.

Yip Slobodan! Careless of me regarding the lighting in front, silly mistake. Thanks.

Your cheque is in the post...

William

[Jeremy Roussak]

It's a fine composition which will be better when you've followed Slobodan's advice (and paid him, of course). To my eye, a little anti-clockwise rotation would be good, too.

Jeremy

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

It is wonderful as is, and the processing is so almost perfect, I would love to see a redo of it with perhaps some of Slobodan's suggestions implemented. The mood is very evocative.

When you pay him, make him come to you to collect the check.   

Eric

[RSL]

I'd proceed very, very carefully making changes. There appears to be a halo on the trunk of the car, but it isn't repeated on the front. What's up front clearly is a reflection of the lights from the polished hood. Check the relationship between the left headlight and the wall behind it. Maybe I'm going blind but I don't see a halo. I suspect what appear to be a trunk halo and a top halo are simply more of the reflection I'm seeing on the hood. As far as the blocked shadows in the bushes are concerned, if you add too much detail in those bushes you're going to detract from the relationship between the car and the lights behind it. I'd agree there's a problem at the far left, but a little burning-in might solve it without a crop. Sometimes you just gotta crop, but it's usually an attempt to throw a lifesaver to a botched framing job. As Cartier-Bresson pointed out in The Decisive Moment, once you start chopping up a well composed picture you leave behind clues that jump out for anybody with eyes to see. This is too fine a shot to screw up in post-processing. And don't pay Slobodan more than a dime unless he can demonstrate an improvement.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

This is the halo I was talking about. There is no believable reason for the car front to be illuminated. Any light illuminating the front would have illuminated the wall next to it at the same time. My impression is that the a lot of the image was burned (darkened) in post deliberately, including the stairs, bush and the wall on the far right, while the car front was dodged (lightened up). It is a nice atmospheric image, but needs a tiny bit more detail to function as such.

[RSL]

I concede the point. Slobodan's right. I missed that halo because it's very diffuse. But it's there. Good eye, Slobodan.

[Tony Jay]

The post-processing issues are very subtle.
Nonetheless a grand composition and a wonderful result!

Tony Jay

[stamper]

Personally speaking very small defects don't bother me. It is a critique not a forensic examination. Overall I like the mood and processing and if you aren't looking at it through a magnifying glass it is a fine image.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Personally speaking very small defects don't bother me. It is a critique not a forensic examination. Overall I like the mood and processing and if you aren't looking at it through a magnifying glass it is a fine image.

Well said.

Eric

[William Walker]

Personally speaking very small defects don't bother me. It is a critique not a forensic examination. Overall I like the mood and processing and if you aren't looking at it through a magnifying glass it is a fine image.

Stamper! I'm always honoured when I hear from you!

I think the main thing that Slobodan has taught me is something I should know by now, that is, to really have a good look at an image before you commit it to public view. It is not so much the halo that was created - to be honest, I don't know how many people would recognise it for what it was. I had to double check to see that I had, in fact, lightened that area up with a radial filter in Lightroom. What irritated me was that I was sloppy in doing so! For that kick in-the-ass I thank my old friend Slobodan.

You, I thank for bringing a bit of balance, and to Tony, Eric, Russ, Jeremy and Graham, thanks for your valued (as usual) input.

This is why I still come here.

William

[Peter McLennan]

There is no believable reason for the car front to be illuminated.

Why do you say that? 

Any light illuminating the front would have illuminated the wall next to it at the same time.

Unless the light was intentionally or accidentally blocked from hitting the wall by something.  Something like a shrub.  Or a flag or a gobo.

In any case, it's a fine shot and the front end halo is easily mitigated.

[GrahamBy]

I did not question that, but the car front lighting.

Well spotted, indeed. Now I can't help but see it :-)

This raises an interesting question: to what extent is any local dodgy or burning always going to look unnatural?

In the sense that it will always change perceived lighting of the scene...possibly requiring an additional light source to explain. Whereas changing global curves is much more credible in that it could be explained by a different intensity of the existing light. Opinions?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I'm with Peter on this.

It looked believable to me at first glance, and even having the "flaw" pointed out to me, I can think of several reasons for the lighting to be like that.

I hate to disagree with Slobodan (correction: It's fun to disagree, but the opportunity doesn't arise often enough) but I think he is expecting carefully controlled studio lighting, like what he gets in his photos (Chicago, New York, etc.).   

-Eric