/ Register

Architecture and people

Discussion in 'Landscapes, Architecture, and Cityscapes' started by daodang, Feb 17, 2005.

  1. daodang

    daodang

    1,901
    Feb 1, 2005
    Montreal Quebec Canada
    Hi,

    I try to put into pratice some guidelines about composition learned throughout books and articles got from the net. These pictures were taken last year but I would like to show them here for critics and comments, so I can learn more. Please feel free to comment about what is good and what is wrong.

    39857297.

    39857299.

    Thanks in advance.
     
    daodang, Feb 17, 2005
    #1
  2. greyflash

    greyflash Subscribing Member

    30,494
    Jan 29, 2005
    St. George, Utah
    The first image: Talk about drawing your attention into the image. Great DOF and love the warm colors. This is first rate. Second image: You've really peaqued my interest as to what they are all looking at. Interesting geometric shapes to highlight the spectators. Nice lead in lines from the two corners. The item in the forground center is distracting to me and fights for my attention with the people. I think the image is about the people. Good job Dao.
     
    greyflash, Feb 17, 2005
    #2
  3. daodang

    daodang

    1,901
    Feb 1, 2005
    Montreal Quebec Canada
    Hi Gordon, thanks for the explicit comments.

    For the item in the foreground of #2, PS will send it into the void. :D
     
    daodang, Feb 17, 2005
    #3
  4. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Dao,

    The first one is perfect to me.
    That is a novice opinion, because I am.

    Second one, I wanted to look sideways.

    Is this a fisheye. ??? (novice looking)

    yes the thingy is distracting in center bottom.

    I love the compositions, clarity, lighting, and the colors.

    By commenting to you, if I am seeing wrong, you get to teach me how to see. Thanks

    Regards
    Gale
     
    Gale, Feb 17, 2005
    #4
  5. Flew

    Flew

    994
    Jan 25, 2005
    Alabama
    Hey Dao,

    I'm with Gale, being a complete novice in this area. I know that I do like these shots, especially the first, and I know that I've seen many others in a similar vein that weren't nearly as pleasing to the eye.

    If you keep posting shots like these, and we keep getting great feedback from folks like Gordon, maybe Gale and I will learn a little something about architectural phtography.... :wink:

    Thanks,

    Frank
     
    Flew, Feb 17, 2005
    #5
  6. daodang

    daodang

    1,901
    Feb 1, 2005
    Montreal Quebec Canada
    Thank Gale and Frank.

    To Gale: The #2 was taken with a Sigma 15-30mm at 15mm. The place is an underground circular interior courtyard of Montreal Place des Arts (a concert hall). I took the picture from near ground position looking upward so the courtyard's circular opening is distorted hence creating a fisheye illusion.

    Also, could you please explain to me more explicitely the «I wanted to look sideways» Do you mean from another view angle or view position? It will help me shooting this place with a different perspective..
     
    daodang, Feb 17, 2005
    #6
  7. marek

    marek Guest

    #1 has very strong leading lines and forces you to focus on the figure at centre of frame. Good use of a person to add a point of interest.
    #2 is the original one though. To me it looks like an enourmous eye, with the people at the bottom some strange eye-lashes. I agree with the other posters that your eye is driven to the right of frame, but cut off abruptly. SHould have framed wider on the right.

    BTW the sigma 15-30 is a gem! probably my most used lens, though it would be nice if it went a little longer. Then again it is really a 31 mm - check your exif ;)
     
    marek, Feb 18, 2005
    #7
  8. daodang

    daodang

    1,901
    Feb 1, 2005
    Montreal Quebec Canada
    Hi Marek,

    a great thank for the abrupt cutoff of view on the right side of #2. I'm impressed that you got an eye for evaluating what's the used wide-angle focal length. My Exif indicates 34mm not 15mm as I thought.

    Thanks.
     
    daodang, Feb 18, 2005
    #8
  9. marek

    marek Guest

    I meant that the 15-30mm lens acutally goes to 31mm real focal length. But anyhoo... ;)
     
    marek, Feb 18, 2005
    #9
  10. daodang

    daodang

    1,901
    Feb 1, 2005
    Montreal Quebec Canada
    Hi Marek,

    Shame on me about the misinterpretation :oops: . Yes I already notice that the EXIF indication isn't 30mm but 31mm for the Sigma lens.
    Talking about a little longer wide-angle zoom, try out the Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4.5. I received it as a holiday gift and it's quite a lens. Lightweight, compact, reasonably priced and IMHO as sharp as the Nikon 17-35mm when stopped down past f/4. Color is neutral. Flare is well controlled (compared to the Sigma). On the downside, it has variable apertures when zooming and wide-open at 17mm, it's softer then the Nikon.

    Nice to meet you.
     
    daodang, Feb 18, 2005
    #10
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Critique New Mexico Landscapes, Architecture, and Cityscapes Apr 8, 2017
St. Louis Abstract Architecture Landscapes, Architecture, and Cityscapes Jan 22, 2017
More Aruba Architecture 2014 Landscapes, Architecture, and Cityscapes Mar 29, 2014
Aruba Architecture 2014 Landscapes, Architecture, and Cityscapes Mar 29, 2014
SoBe architecture (B&W) Landscapes, Architecture, and Cityscapes Oct 31, 2013
  • mpb.com