Looking for Pointers, Again - NYC image

[rgeorge911]

Hello fellow NfFers,

I went to New York City this weekend, and overall am not satisfied with the quality of my images.  I walked many miles, and shot a lot.  I guess it takes time to warm up to the city.  Or, maybe I was just off.  It happens.

Anyway, here's one that I'd like your input on:

L9996489-1-2.jpg by reed_flickr, on Flickr

Again, don't be gentle.  I appreciate your insights.  It may pay to click and view it larger.  The cross on left is the focal point, but is pretty small.  I only took one lens with me on this trip.

Regards,
Reed

[jamesmck]

This is hard, Reed, with that dark building in the background.  Maybe moving yourself to the left, but then the two steeples would be against the relatively bare sky (pity the lack of gorgeous clouds).  I tried a crop to get rid of some of the distracting bits of building and sky on the left of the frame.  I think it's better, but still not great.  I also messed just a little with shadows (to lighten that building a tad) and mid-tone contrast.

[rgeorge911]

Thanks, James.  It's funny how each person takes something different from an image.  I actually shot it that way, because I like the contrast of the modern (boring, rectangular) building with the classic church architecture.  But, what really caught my eye was the sunlight on the tip of the steeple on left, against the dark modern building background.

Happy to hear more thoughts!

Reed

[Julio1fer]

Reed, I think I understand what you saw there, but it might well be one of those impossible shots to capture.

The dark building is a good opportunity for contrast (spirit, tone and color) with the elaborated towers, but then you'd need to include just those two elements in the picture, maybe just a single tower, depending on the angle you can get, and enough of it for the viewer to appreciate it.

The light did not help IMHO, the shadowed tower at the right against a clear sky bothers me.

I tried isolating the left-side tower against the background, and increasing contrast, so there:



You'd need a 135 mm or so to capture this one, and maybe a good tripod. A blurred background would also help.

[Dennis Gallus]

Reed,

Without looking at prior comments, I think that this photo is all about comparing and contrasting.  You have a very old architectural style vs. a new one, a very delicate structure vs. a massive, solid one, a light exterior vs. an almost black one.  Does it succeed or not?  I'm not sure.  I think the big rectangular building perhaps dominates the photo too much.  The cross, with the shaft of light on it, should be the thing that resolves the conflict between the other two themes, but it appears rather small compared to everything else.

Would a wider-angle lens cause the massive building to recede in such a way as to make the cross and steeples more important?  I'm not sure.   You probably could not find a place to stand to make that happen.

One could read all kinds of symbolism into your photo, and for that reason, as well as the theme and the color, I like it.  But I am not sure just how to improve it.

Dennis

[wlewisiii]

Difficult one, I agree. I think had I been looking at this I would have tried to come left and gotten the left steeple off of the office building. How I would have imagined it would be the office building on the left, the left steeple in the middle and the right steeple on the right edge with blue sky behind them both and both just touching the top of the frame.

Have you tried converting to monochrome? I think this might work better as light levels than as colors.

[LarryD]

Thing is You have to repeat what you see in an image you have in your mid to the final. And in this age it means learning software. Ansel Adams used the old Dodge burn and other tricks that many of us learned in the dark room and in a digital world if you use a hybrid or total process of digital or film you have to work it from the moment you see it to where you display it.

 Raw images are but the starting point to make a masterpiece or a slimey mess.You have the Raw use it.

Larry

[rgeorge911]

Many more interesting points - thanks to all.

My natural response to this situation would have been as mentioned - use a telephoto and isolate the cross against the dark background.  I'm a telephoto guy by nature.  Honestly, I don't think that would have captured what I felt at the moment.

Moving to the left would have put both crosses against a boring blue sky.  I detest boring skies (especially white, at least this one was blue).

Just my opinion(s).

Maybe this was one of those moments that I could not adequately capture the feeling in the image.

Thanks for the great input, and keep it coming!

Reed

[jamesmck]

Maybe this was one of those moments that I could not adequately capture the feeling in the image.

I think you've hit it here, Reed.  The camera falls far short of the eye and the rest of the central nervous system and frequently cannot even approach capturing what we "see."  Luckily for the photographer, the camera does often succeed.

[radiophoto]

Reed, I like what you're trying to capture here, I think I can see some of it.  For me, the most interesting part of it is that little bit of sunshine on the left-hand cross, so I have tried a different crop, one that eliminates more of the sky and brings the cross closer to the center of focus.



O'course, the skyscraper is still there, but its importance is diminished and now serves more as background to the main part.

If another trip to NYC is in your future, you might seek this out again and try a different viewpoint.

P.S. can you intensify the sunlight here?