Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Roberto Frieri on October 08, 2011, 03:53:41 pm

Title: City shapes
Post by: Roberto Frieri on October 08, 2011, 03:53:41 pm
M8 + Biogon 2/35 & Capture One
Title: Re: City shapes
Post by: RSL on October 08, 2011, 05:08:35 pm
1 and 2 are Tossers, Roberto, but the composition in #3 is very good, resulting in an arresting picture.
Title: Re: City shapes
Post by: wolfnowl on October 09, 2011, 02:21:17 am
I'm with Russ on this one.  #3 is very well done.

Mike.
Title: Re: City shapes
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on October 09, 2011, 03:34:10 am
1 and 2 are Tossers, Roberto, but the composition in #3 is very good, resulting in an arresting picture.
I agree with you about the photos, Russ: #3 is indeed striking. The word "tosser", however, has a different meaning, at least in England, to that which you intended (one indulging in what used, quaintly, to be called "self-abuse").

Just so you know...

Jeremy
Title: Re: City shapes
Post by: RSL on October 09, 2011, 12:01:02 pm
Thanks, Jeremy. I learn something new every day. During my military career I spent a lot of time with British, Canadians, and Australians and never heard that usage. On the other hand, in a very remote way it parallels what I intended to convey.
Title: Re: City shapes
Post by: Roberto Frieri on November 09, 2011, 03:56:39 am
Some more...
Title: Re: City shapes
Post by: wolfnowl on November 09, 2011, 02:18:56 pm
If it was me I'd be tempted to lighten the face of the angel just a little.  We're automatically drawn to others' eyes, and this doesn't provide enough information...

Mike.
Title: Re: City shapes
Post by: Farmer on November 09, 2011, 04:00:43 pm
I like the angel more than Neptune.  Neptune seems more like a record shot, whereas the angel has use of depth of field to give the angel some pop and interest - it's more like it's a model and you've added creativity with the depth of field and focus point.  I agree that some more detail in the face would be nice.