Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: fdisilvestro on September 24, 2014, 09:14:08 am
-
Hi, I'm doing a series of architectural images as a personal study. I would appreciate your comments and critiques.
The attached image is from the inside of the Melbourne Convention Centre. Available light, exposure blending with HDR efex
Thanks for watching
Regards,
-
I'm not sure if this image works for me.
Both the columns and the sloping wall lead my eye down the hallway, but once it gets there I don't find much to look at. So at first blush I'm disappointed.
Now that said, this was offered in the context of architectural study. We can't go full-McLuhan here (the actual medium is photography) but if the columns and wall are themselves the message, then of course there's nothing to look at come the end of the hallway?
-
A very well-executed photograph - technically flawless from my perspective. I would love to see a study of the great designs to the right, but I understand you are trying to show the building, the space and how they work together. This I think you've been successful with, but i don't see this as an emotive photograph.
Perhaps B&W would help to remove it from reality enough to become more emotive.
-
Frank, It's a fine shot. My only (small) beef is that the scene beyond the windows is pretty much blown. I'm not sure you could solve that problem but two possibilities come to mind: (1) Use speedlights for the interior, set the no-flash exposure for outdoors, then experiment with flash intensities until they're right and drag the shutter to get the outdoors. (2) Expose so that there's more outside detail and then use a gradient with blending mode screen to bring up the right side of the picture. But my concern really is a nitpick.
-
Thanks for your comments!
Shawnino: I was trying to capture the architectural elements but I understand your point about nothing special at the end of the hallway
Terry: Agree, it is not an emotive image, I was concentrating on the technical aspects at this first stage of my study.
Russ: Yes, those areas are blown out. I bracketed exposures with the intention to do some exposure blending with HDR but I did not bracket enough. Even the darkest capture has those external areas blown.
Here is another photo of the same location, a different angle and a different treatment (single capture, edited in LR)
-
A very good shot of some VERY ugly architecture.
I want to meet the dealer of the Melbourne city planners - they're out of control.. ;D
-
The building certainly looks more "alive" with people in it!
-
Russ: Yes, those areas are blown out. I bracketed exposures with the intention to do some exposure blending with HDR but I did not bracket enough. Even the darkest capture has those external areas blown.
Yeah, I do HDR every once in a while, but for some reason when I'm looking at something like this I always seem to forget HDR and think about speedlights instead. HDR, of course, is the third alternative. Try a nine shot spread if you get another chance.
I like the pictures.
-
Thanks again for your comments!
A very good shot of some VERY ugly architecture.
I want to meet the dealer of the Melbourne city planners - they're out of control.. ;D
Haha! I would say it is controversial, in any case it was one of the few buildings that would allow me to shoot inside using a tripod without being commissioned, just getting there and asking permission.
Yeah, I do HDR every once in a while, but for some reason when I'm looking at something like this I always seem to forget HDR and think about speedlights instead. HDR, of course, is the third alternative. Try a nine shot spread if you get another chance.
I like the pictures.
Thanks Russ, the space is huge, so I guess I would need multiple flashes which could be difficult to set up as non-commissioned work.
Here is another image looking the other way. This is a single capture with lots of Post processing in LR to lift the shadows (and the exterior is not blown). The disadvantage, that is not apparent in this small size, is the increased noise compared to the HDR approach.
Regards,
-
Yeah, lighting the place with artificial light would be difficult at best. Joe McNally probably would love the challenge, but I think I'd pass it by. Without HDR, noise always is a problem with a dynamic range like this one. With HDR the problem always is getting the tone mapping to the point where it doesn't look like HDR.
Interesting and striking architecture. Whether or not it's "ugly" is a personal opinion.
-
Another option to the HDR problem is to go back at a different time of day - when outside is not so bright compared to the inside.
Just a thought.
Mal
-
Trouble is, Mal, the outside light is what's providing almost all of the inside light.
-
Russ
You may well be right -
Mal