Rail Lines
Jan 3, 2021 20:55:24 #
Kozan
Loc: Trenton Tennessee
rmalarz wrote:
Frank, I like the first one, as it's a perspective of rail lines that one doesn't normally see.
The second one looks like a contrived assembly.
--Bob
The second one looks like a contrived assembly.
--Bob
Especially since it is obvious the sun is coming from the left, throwing a shadow to the right of the rails.
Still, it's a nice picture.
Jan 3, 2021 21:28:44 #
SalvageDiver wrote:
Hi Frank, br br Nice composites, both of them. br... (show quote)
Thanks for your detailed analysis. I know that one of the areas I need work on are shadow directions and the lights direction. As i previously mentioned, I thought the orginal had good bones. Though I like both, if I had to choose I would pick #1 for the same reason for it's warmth.
Jan 4, 2021 03:30:17 #
foggypreacher
Loc: Dickinson, Texas
NJFrank wrote:
Which do you prefer one two or neither. Please let me know why you made your choice. Thanks in advance.
Hi Frank,
I like the first one. The plane and the darkened sky did not catch my eye like the first one. Thanks for your effort to be contriving.
Jan 4, 2021 07:13:51 #
foggypreacher wrote:
Hi Frank,
I like the first one. The plane and the darkened sky did not catch my eye like the first one. Thanks for your effort to be contriving.
I like the first one. The plane and the darkened sky did not catch my eye like the first one. Thanks for your effort to be contriving.
Thanks for commenting. I enjoy doing composites. My idea here was to show that there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Jan 4, 2021 12:43:54 #
NJFrank wrote:
The original had a washed out sky. I felt it needed something to make it pop. Seem many find the plane a distraction. Perhaps the first one is more to your liking.
Oh, yes, I like the sky and effects in #2 but not with the moon and plane
Jan 4, 2021 13:05:33 #
dpullum wrote:
Oh, yes, I like the sky and effects in #2 but not with the moon and plane
For me the original shot had multiple ways of going. I just happen to present two. But thing can always be added or subtracted altering the look. For me that is the fun of creating a composite.
Jan 4, 2021 15:33:10 #
Jan 4, 2021 15:58:23 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
NJFrank wrote:
Which do you prefer one two or neither. Please let me know why you made your choice. Thanks in advance.
I prefer the first more although it looks like you may have replaced the sky. Good sky replacements shouldn't be obvious and this one is not terrible but it "feels" like a replacement. In the second image the sky replacement is much more obvious and contrived looking. However, the leading line of the rail in the second image is much more effective. In the first image the eye is distracted from following the leading line because of the very dramatic and colorful sky. Both images would have been far better in my opinion with simpler and less dramatic skies. The sky after all is not the focal point of these images, the rails are. Very often highly dramatic replacement skies direct the eyes away from the main subject of an image. Was that your intent?
Jan 4, 2021 16:11:25 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
dpullum wrote:
The rail alone is a photo story, mixing the moon and airplane is a competition for eye-attention, it detracts from a good rail vanishing point photo. The upper/right quadrant is another photo story. For both, KIS, keep it simple is best.
Completely agree
Jan 4, 2021 16:11:36 #
msilvers, thank you for your detail analysis for this thread. As previously mention the sky was flat white. Good for replacing with a new sky. But bad for aesthetics. Like everything else in life, moderation. So it would not surprise myself if I got a little carried away. For me composites are always a work in progress
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.