Brighton Aids Memorial, Take 3!

[sam_justice]

Taking a different approach this time, but the idea of the composition remains the same.
"I want my image to look as though they're looking into the sky looking for there lost loved ones."
The sun was shining directly in front of the statue so I was able to get some nice silhouettes.

There are still some brush strokes in the sky since the post isn't complete but I wanted to show the composition. I had to duplicate the sky, flip it, and place it on top of the image to get the extra room for the composition. Still needs some cleaning up.

Been playing with various filters, some I've done myself, a couple are done through Nik Color Efex.

What do you think?

#1

#2

#3

#4

 

[sam_justice]

Bump?

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Its a cool third take, but I don't think the statue has enough detail for a silhouette to be as dramatic. If I didn't have a concept of your other attempts, I wouldn't really know what I was looking at here.

I applaud you for trying to exhuast the creative possibilities though, keep at it.

 

[ChevyBaby]

Hmmm.... i don't like these.... i really fecking LOVED the other one you posted, everything about it, i loved, even that the houses were distorted... i just loved it, i'd buy that as a postcard.

 

[ann]

good for you to try many approaches, the piece is wonderful, but a bear to photograph. This is not my favorite , but how would one know if you didn't try.

 

[tirediron]

Sorry, I'm sticking with my original statement. I like ver 1.0 the best! These are interesting, but...

 

[sam_justice]

The biggest lesson I've learnt from this project is to take the critcism with a grain of salt, this isn't to douse anyones personal work or criticism. It just seems as though the ideas and thoughts given would appear to be from the photographers personal preference as opposed to a technical one.

It's a nice feeling that my original idea and composition is the favourite.

 

[tirediron]

The biggest lesson I've learnt from this project is to take the critcism with a grain of salt, this isn't to douse anyones personal work or criticism. It just seems as though the ideas and thoughts given would appear to be from the photographers personal preference as opposed to a technical one.

It's a nice feeling that my original idea and composition is the favourite.

Very true; pretty much all interpretation of a photograph is subjective and therefore opinion. Even so-called technical aspects such as exposure can be considered artistic, and therefore subjective qualities if the photographer says, "I did this because..." There is no right or wrong, there is only "I like it or I don't".

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

The biggest lesson I've learnt from this project is to take the critcism with a grain of salt, this isn't to douse anyones personal work or criticism. It just seems as though the ideas and thoughts given would appear to be from the photographers personal preference as opposed to a technical one.

It's a nice feeling that my original idea and composition is the favourite.

I don't think anybody told you exactly how to shoot this project. Many people gave you things to think about, though. It's tough to seperate "personal preference" from technical comments. Often what is seen as personal preference is based on proven effects of visual elements. Comments were also given in context to what you said you were going for, in the first thread, which was drama. There are some "ideas" that can be viewed as "fact" when talking about visual effects of composition. Such as, in the very first pic, the sky took up exactly half the image. That has visual weight that diminishes a subject that takes up such a small part of the frame. Another proven idea is that light advances and dark receeds. If half of your image is light, and your small subject is dark, your dark subject gets lost. Another thing based on "science" is that rather detailed things when not your subject, will distract the viewer from a rather simple subject.

When you started your second thread, you scrapped your original idea of trying to create drama, and said that you were just trying to capture an "entity". That becomes a different ball game.

What I am glad to see, is your taking peoples toughts on board, and really studying this subject and working it out. That's how an artist works. ChevyBaby posted light studies for her concept shoot. She was working out what lighting would best help support her vision. When I gave you comments and suggestions, it was from the position of "teaching". It is entirely up to you how you approach this and get your point across. People can only make you think. Thinking is good. Shutting them out, can slow down learning. On the other hand, I and others can look at this and get a definite idea of how they would approach the subject and how they would frame the shot. That does you no good, and is not coming from your viewpoint.

After watching your studies progress, I to will go back to the original. It is the best by far. The latter images have technical weekness, and became over simplified. To my eye and mind, what looks best to me, is your first shot, cropped landscape, losing so much sky, and bringing the primary subject more to the forefront. That is my opinion.

Again, I applaud you for really trying to work through this. It isn't often on this forum we get to see suggestions taken on board, and then actually used. Typically it's K THNX BYE (in a manner of speaking).

:thumbup:

Oh, and there is a subtle difference to people saying they "would" buy an image, and them actually doing so.

 

[sam_justice]

The biggest lesson I've learnt from this project is to take the critcism with a grain of salt, this isn't to douse anyones personal work or criticism. It just seems as though the ideas and thoughts given would appear to be from the photographers personal preference as opposed to a technical one.

It's a nice feeling that my original idea and composition is the favourite.

I don't think anybody told you exactly how to shoot this project. Many people gave you things to think about, though. It's tough to seperate "personal preference" from technical comments. Often what is seen as personal preference is based on proven effects of visual elements. Comments were also given in context to what you said you were going for, in the first thread, which was drama. There are some "ideas" that can be viewed as "fact" when talking about visual effects of composition. Such as, in the very first pic, the sky took up exactly half the image. That has visual weight that diminishes a subject that takes up such a small part of the frame. Another proven idea is that light advances and dark receeds. If half of your image is light, and your small subject is dark, your dark subject gets lost. Another thing based on "science" is that rather detailed things when not your subject, will distract the viewer from a rather simple subject.

When you started your second thread, you scrapped your original idea of trying to create drama, and said that you were just trying to capture an "entity". That becomes a different ball game.

What I am glad to see, is your taking peoples toughts on board, and really studying this subject and working it out. That's how an artist works. ChevyBaby posted light studies for her concept shoot. She was working out what lighting would best help support her vision. When I gave you comments and suggestions, it was from the position of "teaching". It is entirely up to you how you approach this and get your point across. People can only make you think. Thinking is good. Shutting them out, can slow down learning. On the other hand, I and others can look at this and get a definite idea of how they would approach the subject and how they would frame the shot. That does you no good, and is not coming from your viewpoint.

After watching your studies progress, I to will go back to the original. It is the best by far. The latter images have technical weekness, and became over simplified. To my eye and mind, what looks best to me, is your first shot, cropped landscape, losing so much sky, and bringing the primary subject more to the forefront. That is my opinion.

Again, I applaud you for really trying to work through this. It isn't often on this forum we get to see suggestions taken on board, and then actually used. Typically it's K THNX BYE (in a manner of speaking).

:thumbup:

Oh, and there is a subtle difference to people saying they "would" buy an image, and them actually doing so.

I certainly didn't mean to diminsh anyones criticism it is greatly appreciated. I completely agree that tried and true compositional techniques will always yield the best result. Apologies for the short reply I'm on my phone and it's horrible for writing on forums.

 

[sam_justice]

Okay so here, after all the C&C is what I believe to be the final composition.

This version has selective sharpening, the buildings are the unsharpest part of the picture.
The lens distortion has been fixed, not only straightening the building but bringing out the statue more.
The buildings have been darkened using a selective curving mask.
The sky has been darkened (not as much as the buildings) using a selective curving mask.
Getting rid of the cars would've been extremely hard to do but I quite like them there in the final shot, along with the buildings it shows that the statue is in the centre of a very residential area. The cars help echo this.
The area around and behind the statue has been cleaned up.

 

[NikonNewbie]

Hmmm.... i don't like these.... i really fecking LOVED the other one you posted, everything about it, i loved, even that the houses were distorted... i just loved it, i'd buy that as a postcard.

I agree.
And with the other ones you had a better idea of what those statues were, with this angle, if you didnt' tell me what they were, they coulda been just "some art work somewhere in NY" kwim?

I like them all but I think your 1st set was my favorite.

 

[Robin Usagani]

HOw about 4th try.. similar to 3rd try but introduce off camera flash on the subject.

 

[ChevyBaby]

Okay so here, after all the C&C is what I believe to be the final composition.

This version has selective sharpening, the buildings are the unsharpest part of the picture.
The lens distortion has been fixed, not only straightening the building but bringing out the statue more.
The buildings have been darkened using a selective curving mask.
The sky has been darkened (not as much as the buildings) using a selective curving mask.
Getting rid of the cars would've been extremely hard to do but I quite like them there in the final shot, along with the buildings it shows that the statue is in the centre of a very residential area. The cars help echo this.
The area around and behind the statue has been cleaned up.

Would this image have been better if taken from a lower viewpoint?

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

To me, losing that huge expanse of sky made a world of difference. :thumbup: