Composition.
Aug 3, 2014 13:00:31 #
What is your opinion about composition of this picture? If you do not like it you can crop it.
Aug 3, 2014 13:06:18 #
The only thing I do not like and you cannot do anything about is that the tree clump obscures the memorial monument.
There may have been better vantage point, or not.
There is an apparent slant in the picture but I cannot decide if this is due to the monument itself (pyramid) or something else. The pole on the right is vertical so I would lean toward the monument's shape more than anything else.
There may have been better vantage point, or not.
There is an apparent slant in the picture but I cannot decide if this is due to the monument itself (pyramid) or something else. The pole on the right is vertical so I would lean toward the monument's shape more than anything else.
Aug 3, 2014 13:08:04 #
MMC wrote:
What is your opinion about composition of this picture? If you do not like it you can crop it.
I probably would have walked down the side walk to exclude the light poll and what appear to be tables. To me the tree covers too much of the monument and it's too distant for the shot.
I think I see what you were after, not trying to make the monument the subject of the shot but only part of it but I think I still would have moved.
Aug 3, 2014 13:10:25 #
Rongnongno wrote:
The only thing I do not like and you cannot do anything about is that the tree clump obscures the memorial monument.
There may have been better vantage point, or not.
There is an apparent slant in the picture but I cannot decide if this is due to the monument itself (pyramid) or something else. The pole on the right is vertical so I would lean toward the monument's shape more than anything else.
There may have been better vantage point, or not.
There is an apparent slant in the picture but I cannot decide if this is due to the monument itself (pyramid) or something else. The pole on the right is vertical so I would lean toward the monument's shape more than anything else.
I agree about the tree, but am at a loss as to which way to move.
Aug 3, 2014 13:12:22 #
jimmya wrote:
If you take the time to think about, the pole adds the prospective needed to gauge the distance as well as scale. Suppressing it would be a mistake. This is a common mistake when taking a picture like this one: Forgetting the point of reference.I probably would have walked down the side walk to exclude the light poll and what appear to be tables. To me the tree covers too much of the monument and it's too distant for the shot.
I think I see what you were after, not trying to make the monument the subject of the shot but only part of it but I think I still would have moved.
I think I see what you were after, not trying to make the monument the subject of the shot but only part of it but I think I still would have moved.
Kudos for having included it.
Aug 3, 2014 13:14:32 #
jethro779 wrote:
Moving to the right would have helped but the pole then would become a problem vs an asset and the perspective would change so... 'or not' is all I can offer a suggestion. This is well done considering the situation and difficulties offered.I agree about the tree, but am at a loss as to which way to move.
Aug 3, 2014 13:14:51 #
jethro779 wrote:
I agree about the tree, but am at a loss as to which way to move.
I would move forward and to the right, up the walk and toward the monument. Want to see the water and hill beyond would still not be a problem staging the monument frame left. Just an opinion.
Aug 3, 2014 13:15:04 #
Thanks for your comment. I tried to correct distortion. Is it better?
Rongnongno wrote:
The only thing I do not like and you cannot do anything about is that the tree clump obscures the memorial monument.
There may have been better vantage point, or not.
There is an apparent slant in the picture but I cannot decide if this is due to the monument itself (pyramid) or something else. The pole on the right is vertical so I would lean toward the monument's shape more than anything else.
There may have been better vantage point, or not.
There is an apparent slant in the picture but I cannot decide if this is due to the monument itself (pyramid) or something else. The pole on the right is vertical so I would lean toward the monument's shape more than anything else.
Aug 3, 2014 13:17:37 #
No, it was fine before. The apparent distortion cannot be corrected easily. You clipped the trees and this left the picture unfinished. Sometimes one need to learn NOT to listen and appreciate what exist already, as is.
My comment on the slant reflects my thought process more than anything.
My comment on the slant reflects my thought process more than anything.
Aug 3, 2014 13:21:01 #
jimmya wrote:
Err what water? This is a plain with what appears to be numerous dwelling in it...I would move forward and to the right, up the walk and toward the monument. Want to see the water and hill beyond would still not be a problem staging the monument frame left. Just an opinion.
Also including a background that is 'interesting' - if it existed - would divert from the main subject: The monument.
Aug 3, 2014 13:22:35 #
Thank you for looking and you opinion. I have taken many pictures of this monument from different points. I posted this one to know if this composition is good or should I crop it?
jimmya wrote:
I probably would have walked down the side walk to exclude the light poll and what appear to be tables. To me the tree covers too much of the monument and it's too distant for the shot.
I think I see what you were after, not trying to make the monument the subject of the shot but only part of it but I think I still would have moved.
I think I see what you were after, not trying to make the monument the subject of the shot but only part of it but I think I still would have moved.
Aug 3, 2014 13:39:17 #
I did minor adjustments. I am sure you can do something better, more to your liking.
This shows the potential you have in your hands.
This shows the potential you have in your hands.
Aug 3, 2014 16:09:59 #
MMC wrote:
What is your opinion about composition of this picture? If you do not like it you can crop it.
MMC, you're shot is nice and sharp, so technically it's well done. I'm also rarely bothered with small amounts of distortion. If a shot is STRONG enough, you'll NEVER see the distortion. So don't leave the door open for people to start looking for it!
But I personnally don't see a shot here. You have a great expanse of sky and a large patch of grass. Neither have any detail or add to the shot in any way.
It's basically a landscape shot with no landscape. You don't have a clear subject that wants to hold me in the shot.
You actually have a couple of leading lines that want to drop me off at the lamppost, which is more prominent and has better detail and creates more interest, making it a stronger subject than the monument, your obviously intended target.
The monument is just too small to be drawn to it, and what we do see of it is more from the back than from the front, making it a weak perspective. It's no different than taking pics of people from behind. A rearward perspective needs to be juxtaposed.
If it had been me(it wasn't), I would have looked for a perspective a bit more frontish.
Personally, I feel that everybody wants to go wide, but wide makes the detail SOOO small, that it almost ALWAYS loses all impact to the viewer. I feel that shooting tight is an advanced skill, that many just never learn.
MMC, these are of course only MY personal opinions. ;-)
SS
Aug 3, 2014 16:38:34 #
Aug 3, 2014 16:39:40 #
SS, thanks for looking, your comments and opinion.
SharpShooter wrote:
MMC, you're shot is nice and sharp, so technically... (show quote)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.