Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: cityscape  (Read 2377 times)

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
    • pbase galleries
cityscape
« on: November 16, 2010, 10:22:24 PM »

Please critique today's reworking of a photo from April.  Bruce
Logged

David Saffir

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 172
    • http://davidsaffir.wordpress.com
Re: cityscape
« Reply #1 on: November 17, 2010, 12:00:59 AM »

It's clear that you planned the composition pretty carefully, with all the intersecting diagonals and geometry in the shot.

I feel like the walker is just a little bit too close to the right edge of the frame - it feels crowded, and the eye tends to stop there instead of returning or circling back through the image again.

A complex shot, probably harder to do than it looks!

David Saffir

GuruShots Photo Critique

« Last Edit: November 21, 2010, 12:33:56 PM by David Saffir »
Logged

michswiss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 270
Re: cityscape
« Reply #2 on: November 17, 2010, 12:07:33 AM »

I'm having a hard time understanding what the image is saying.  Is it the jumble of the city (San Antonio?), the play of light and shadows or the isolation of the single individual walking out of frame?  It's just all a bit too busy for me and nothing jumped out to say "I'm the story"

The B&W conversion is really grey.  There needs to be more contrast and/or deeper blacks.  For example, the shadows under the fire escape stairs should be much darker to carry impact.

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5129
Re: cityscape
« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2010, 03:58:48 AM »

I think there's simply too much going on. It's hard to get an idea of what the shot is about.

Unusually for me, I don't like the b&w version, either: the complexities seem to be more marked without colour to assist in guiding the eye. It might be improved by increasing contrast, as Jennifer suggests, but I'm not really convinced.

Jeremy
Logged

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: cityscape
« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2010, 06:35:18 AM »

It seems the clue might be the separation of the various objects, be it by luminance or color. To save this image I'd create various layers, with various tonalities/colors mask them out and paint on them to bring back the objects altered (darker, lighter, etc) to separate them. You could also try to get at the same scene at different light conditions.

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
    • pbase galleries
Re: cityscape
« Reply #5 on: November 17, 2010, 10:47:32 AM »

This would likely be a good place for me to start to learn the uses of layers, but in the interest of our time, if not the continuity of the light, I have gone back into my raw files and retrieved a later frame of the pano.  This time I clipped the blacks in the red and blue channels less and used no brighting.  Bruce
« Last Edit: November 17, 2010, 11:57:00 AM by Bruce Cox »
Logged

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: cityscape
« Reply #6 on: November 17, 2010, 11:57:03 AM »

I think the tubes should be brighter and the background darker.
To me in that image the vertical tubes are important and need to stand out.
In the second image you have an interesting truck in the background.
Maybe you could clone the man over?
I see there is room for experiments.

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
    • pbase galleries
Re: cityscape
« Reply #7 on: November 17, 2010, 01:26:07 PM »

I think the tubes should be brighter and the background darker.
To me in that image the vertical tubes are important and need to stand out.
In the second image you have an interesting truck in the background.
Maybe you could clone the man over?
I see there is room for experiments.
   I agree about the tubes and like the idea of adding the walking man back in.  As I can, I will give it a shot.  Thanks    Bruce
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7879
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: cityscape
« Reply #8 on: November 17, 2010, 03:46:08 PM »

Bruce, I agree with Jennifer (michswiss). Technically it's quite a good picture, but as Jeremy said, there's too much going on and it makes it difficult to see what this picture is about. Since I'm not sure what you were trying to do, I'm not sure this is worthwhile advice, but if you were trying to do what I suspect you were you might want to get one of Lee Friedlander's books and run through his pictures of this kind of thing. They're all a lot simpler, which is one reason they're more effective, but there's something else there that I can't describe. You need to see it for yourself.

Justan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1928
    • Justan-Elk.com
Re: cityscape
« Reply #9 on: November 18, 2010, 12:41:16 AM »

It seems the clue might be the separation of the various objects, be it by luminance or color.

Cool idea! I hadn't thought of manipulating parts of the image by luminance before!

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
    • pbase galleries
Re: cityscape
« Reply #10 on: November 18, 2010, 12:03:02 PM »

Bruce, I agree with Jennifer (michswiss). Technically it's quite a good picture, but as Jeremy said, there's too much going on and it makes it difficult to see what this picture is about. Since I'm not sure what you were trying to do, I'm not sure this is worthwhile advice, but if you were trying to do what I suspect you were you might want to get one of Lee Friedlander's books and run through his pictures of this kind of thing. They're all a lot simpler, which is one reason they're more effective, but there's something else there that I can't describe. You need to see it for yourself.
    Glad for a reason to, I checked and was reminded that I lacked Mr. Friedlander's power to causally aline the stars.  It got me back to the files, though.  Maybe these earlier frames are more straight froward, if not simpler.  Bruce
Logged

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: cityscape
« Reply #11 on: November 18, 2010, 12:21:38 PM »

Maybe a bit surreal and not too exact
(quick 'n dirty edit - just to get the idea),
- but what about this edit ?

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
    • pbase galleries
Re: cityscape
« Reply #12 on: November 18, 2010, 01:25:03 PM »

Maybe a bit surreal and not too exact
(quick 'n dirty edit - just to get the idea),
- but what about this edit ?
    Might get a leading role as an alien spaceship in disguise?   Bruce
Logged

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: cityscape
« Reply #13 on: November 18, 2010, 01:36:45 PM »

    Might get a leading role as an alien spaceship in disguise?   Bruce

Shhhh ... don't tell .... they're listening ....

popnfresh

  • Guest
Re: cityscape
« Reply #14 on: November 18, 2010, 03:23:59 PM »

I think it's time to cut bait on this image. The problem is that there's nothing in the image that draws the eye and the context isn't particularly interesting. And the tweaking and cropping isn't really helping.
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7879
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: cityscape
« Reply #15 on: November 18, 2010, 03:53:04 PM »

And the tweaking and cropping isn't really helping.

Exactly. It almost never does. Sorry Bruce. Sometimes you just have to let one go. Technically the shot's excellent. You nailed the exposure; depth is excellent; everything's sharp. But, as Gertrude said, there's no there there.

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
    • pbase galleries
Re: cityscape
« Reply #16 on: November 18, 2010, 04:38:59 PM »

Exactly. It almost never does. Sorry Bruce. Sometimes you just have to let one go. Technically the shot's excellent. You nailed the exposure; depth is excellent; everything's sharp. But, as Gertrude said, there's no there there.
     I agree, thanks for the comments.   Bruce
Logged

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: cityscape
« Reply #17 on: November 19, 2010, 03:45:51 PM »

I always find it fascinating, that when photosoaping an image, even if it is an interesting exercise some problems just can't get washed out.
I like trying, but in the same moment find it relieving to fail and see doing it right from the beginning would have been the way to go ...
Pages: [1]   Go Up