Stairs and Vines

[Todd Suttles]

I like this but think it is going to die on the vine here in a critique.
No comment = remove life support.
Thanks as always,
-/t

Ps, just in case I'm asked why: it was a creepy building, in a creepy place, with no discernable function. What I have done to it in Ps is along the lines of how I envisioned it.

[David Eckels]

Ps, just in case I'm asked why: it was a creepy building, in a creepy place, with no discernable function. What I have done to it in Ps is along the lines of how I envisioned it.

I think you're getting the hang of it. Who cares if anyone else likes it. If you like it, f-'em!
I happen to think the processing matches the mood, which you said was your intent. You might get some purist that want the wall straightened, meh!
If YOU like it, ... Keep at it.

[degrub]

Did you intend for the highlights to be crunchy ?
 

might take a look at some of Ming Thein's B&W city works for comparison.

[rabanito]

It is contrasty and just a little oversharpened but not creepy at all to me.
On the contrary, luminous.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Russ might call it "wabi-sabi," but I prefer "creepy-sabi."
It's expressive just the way it is.

[francois]

I like it a lot but I must say that it's high in contrast (maybe a bit too much?).

[brandtb]

Very nice subject/framing. Way too much contrast/processing, it's really distracting(from the subject) and "calls attention to itself" ...especially "highlighted" vines on center of building. Look at Walker Evan's work in "Let us now praise..."...might be a good "baseline to start from".

[Rob C]

Probably some hefty spider residents inside.

Rob

[Todd Suttles]

Thank you all. Here is another process of it without all the "attention". I don't know if it is "better" so am curious to hear opinions as to to the direction of the changes. Thanks as always, -/t

[David Eckels]

Do YOU like it better?

[degrub]

Thank you all. Here is another process of it without all the "attention". I don't know if it is "better" so am curious to hear opinions as to to the direction of the changes. Thanks as always, -/t

So this type of image might want a mystery, a question to be hanging  in the air.
I think that is what you were trying for in the first version ?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

The new version is gentler on the eyes than the first, but I think for me it wants a bit more contrast to get some of the mood you had in the first version. I'd say, maybe closer to the new version but with a bit of the old version.

[degrub]

Just reading Rob’s recent thread on the adverts for the SL2 Leica in the / “is it art” subforum and seeing the image again reminded me that there can be too much definition and sharpness in an image that becomes distracting from the impression that is intended. Maybe that is what is happening in this image with all the detail in the ivy and the wood. The overall impression gets lost.

[Todd Suttles]

Everyone: I don’t like it “better” but can clearly see that what is “missing” is the image manipulation.  And, that in its previous issue, especially after feedback and clearer eyes, I was repelled by that. So, I think it is a better rendering, but not finished yet. I want to feel more grit for lack of another word in it.. I am going to let it rest a while and look at it again after more forgetting. I don’t think it is, or will be, a great shot but is a good exercise.  Thanks, -/t