A do over, plus an additional shot

[hokies2379]

I re-did this picture from a couple weeks ago taking some of the advice I was given. Curious if there is an improvement.

I also took this on the same shoot. I like it, but I'm hoping the experts can tell me what should be better.

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Derrel]

I think it is better, yeah, but it lacks the mysterious foggy weather of the first visit's shot!

 

[hokies2379]

I think it is better, yeah, but it lacks the mysterious foggy weather of the first visit's shot!

It sure as heck does.

It got too nice in Iowa the last couple of days, but that'll change soon, I'm sure....and I'll do it again! Thanks for remembering.

 

[hokies2379]

However, comparing this to the previous one, I DEFINITELY see the movement both you and @480sparky were referring to last time. It's brutally obvious now.

 

[480sparky41 41]

I'm seeing a lot of softness in the corners of both images, plus a lot of purple tint (chromatic abberation?) in the burned-out highlights of the lights.

I like the symmetry of the bridge (is that the one they wanted to tear down?). But I feel I want to see the actual near side of it. It's a bit too cropped-in for me.

 

[hokies2379]

I'm seeing a lot of softness in the corners of both images, plus a lot of purple tint (chromatic abberation?) in the burned-out highlights of the lights.

I like the symmetry of the bridge (is that the one they wanted to tear down?). But I feel I want to see the actual near side of it. It's a bit too cropped-in for me.

I believe it is the very same bridge. I went back and forth and back and forth on cropping that bridge. I had more, I had less, then more, then less. I went with this one simply because of the symmetry.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app