MaxBloom - what all is bad about this photo?

Am I being lured into some kind of critique trap?

It's very nice. Composition is right on. The exposure is nice and even, but slightly flat IMO and a tough call nonetheless. On one hand I wish the shot overall was a little brighter, but at the same time I wish there was a little more detail in the black guy on the left. Like I said, it's nice as it is, but you might try toying with the curves to lighten just the darkest parts and then maybe up the midtone contrast slightly. Or it could be worthy of an HDR attempt. Well done, in any event.

 

haha, particularly maxbloom

 

Since there are few tones in this picture, it is inevitable that the picture is flat. It seems like it was taken on an overcast day because the shadowy figure on the left is so dim as to almost obscure that the figure seems to be very deeply stained with soot and yet the rest of the figure seems to be the same basic color as the other statue. The other figure is clearer, brighter but there is an obvious burnt out spot on the tip of the nose - I assume that is bird poop - that unfortunately draws the eye.

I am befuddled why Corinna is asking for critique on this as a picture. It is more a straight-on reproduction in 2 dimensions of a 3 dimensional sculpture .

In art books, a picture like this would be used to examine the scupture and not as an example of the photographer's ability. Because of the absence of any defined light creating shadows and highlights to make this interesting there is little for the photographer to do but get in the right position, include the entire thing and get the focus correct.

If I were tasked to do a picture of this scupture, I would include the feet and wait for a brighter day so I could introduce some light and dark elements - something that the sculptor had not already included.

 

I tried messing with it...white and black point adjustment, using curves to pump up contrast a bit, a bit of sharpening...this is what I came up with (it's late here, and it's not perfect):



[Picture removed, as LaFoto has indicated "My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit". Many apologies. - g]



It looks a little more "3-D" to me than the original. Oh well, I'm going to bed.

(PS LaFoto, for some reason, saying "MaxBloom - what all is bad about this photo" can be interpreted to mean "hey, MaxBloom, are you crazy or something, what all is bad about this photo?" The American English term for it is "calling Max out", an confrontational way of disagreeing with someone. I know it wasn't your intention, but for some reason, the EXACT sentence structure you used can imply "calling someone out", at least in American English (which we all know is a 'truer' English than the English spoken in places like England.:mrgreen

 

It probably got no comments because it is almost completely neutral. If you want a reproduction, well its OK.

I didn't respond initially because it would take 3x the effort to write the suggested changes in text as it would to edit the picture but you don't allow edits.

So I just passed it by.

 

Frankly the whole monument is worthy of a clear sharp shot. try shooting at a slight angle instead of head-on.

A little cloning here and there and then using the curves to bring out the tones as Max suggested, might work.....

One man's opinion.........

 

If you're trying to reproduce, as it's been said, it's fine as is.

If you are going for some kind of artistic shot, I would've started lower, to give the angel a taller look, and maybe focused on the angel, leaving the guy in the black soot slightly out of focus or soft focused.

Just me though.

 

Ooops, I am very sorry...edit removed. Please forgive me!:blushing::blushing: