Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: The Ferris Wheel  (Read 2129 times)
Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1875


WWW
« on: September 21, 2012, 10:40:32 AM »
ReplyReply


Link to larger image.

Thanks for looking.
Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1875


WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2012, 11:55:52 AM »
ReplyReply


I’ve replaced the foreground with something less hideous and toned down some of the PP a bit.


Larger image

And then a few days later found a slightly better vantage point.


Larger image

Logged

davidh202
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 546


« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2012, 07:41:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Justan,
 You had a good idea, and have made it worse  Wink

Your subject and focal point is the skyline ,   the barges are distractions. Including a foreground on this type of composition doesn't work
Your original and second were ok, just crop it something like this...
The last one would also do well cropped, without the barges, if you could 'remove'  them ?.

David

« Last Edit: September 26, 2012, 07:49:40 PM by davidh202 » Logged
Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1875


WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2012, 08:09:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I have several other images that essentially similar to your suggested edit. In this particular case, that was not the goal. 

A goal of the compositions here is to provide a visual resting space – a space where one can figuratively step into the image.
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1937


Editing Allowed


« Reply #4 on: September 27, 2012, 09:05:37 AM »
ReplyReply

I could literally and figuratively step into the scene, but only to find myself slipping off on a slippery downhill slope as I find the image's horizon to be a tad kiltered to the right (second viewpoint). I 'm not particulaly bothered by the barges but not sure the need for an artificial foreground when a nice pano with a much narrower foreground would work quite well. I am also bothered by the sharpness of the full moon because I know full well on a night shot like this, you can't have both. I think it takes away more than it adds.

I think it is certainly worth another visit and perhaps a stitched pano or a little tighter crop would give you a stunning image of a city skyline at night.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1875


WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 28, 2012, 09:14:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for your comments.

> I could literally and figuratively step into the scene, but only to find myself slipping off on a slippery downhill slope as I find the image's horizon to be a tad kiltered to the right (second viewpoint).

Huh?

> I 'm not particulaly bothered by the barges but not sure the need for an artificial foreground when a nice pano with a much narrower foreground would work quite well.

The second image doesn’t have an artificial foreground. My apology for an OCD moment, but you have used “particulaly” which is spelled “particularly” if I understand the word you are using.

> I am also bothered by the sharpness of the full moon because I know full well on a night shot like this, you can't have both. I think it takes away more than it adds.

Interesting comment. In the original image there is a pronounced halo around the moon. I think that reducing the image from what PS says is about 70” wide in the original down to about 5” or so in the jpg may have something to do with the edginess of the moon and likely elsewhere.

> I think it is certainly worth another visit and perhaps a stitched pano or a little tighter crop would give you a stunning image of a city skyline at night.

FWIW the first image is a stitch of 7 images, iirc, and the 2nd is a stitch of 13 images.

While I’ve been doing mostly stitches for the last 4 years, I like to try different techniques. It’s an opportunity to learn and doing the same thing over and over gets boring.
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1937


Editing Allowed


« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2012, 09:58:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for your comments.

> I could literally and figuratively step into the scene, but only to find myself slipping off on a slippery downhill slope as I find the image's horizon to be a tad kiltered to the right (second viewpoint).

Huh?

it's sloping from left to right by about 1.5 to 2 degrees.

> I 'm not particulaly bothered by the barges but not sure the need for an artificial foreground when a nice pano with a much narrower foreground would work quite well.

The second image doesn’t have an artificial foreground. My apology for an OCD moment, but you have used “particulaly” which is spelled “particularly” if I understand the word you are using.

I am actually a great speller but a lousy typist. I try to double check but don't always catch the boo-boos. Sorry, I misunderstood the original comment of adding a new foreground and thought this carried over to the reimage.

> I am also bothered by the sharpness of the full moon because I know full well on a night shot like this, you can't have both. I think it takes away more than it adds.

Interesting comment. In the original image there is a pronounced halo around the moon. I think that reducing the image from what PS says is about 70” wide in the original down to about 5” or so in the jpg may have something to do with the edginess of the moon and likely elsewhere.

> I think it is certainly worth another visit and perhaps a stitched pano or a little tighter crop would give you a stunning image of a city skyline at night.

FWIW the first image is a stitch of 7 images, iirc, and the 2nd is a stitch of 13 images.

While I’ve been doing mostly stitches for the last 4 years, I like to try different techniques. It’s an opportunity to learn and doing the same thing over and over gets boring.

Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad