chicago at night

[seerskater]

c + c would be great

 

[seerskater]

sorry i guess i should have posted this in the landscape in cityscape forum, can i move it somehow

 

[johngpt]

Numbers 3 and 4: :thumbup:

 

[Crazydad]

Numbers 3 and 4: :thumbup:

What he said. Nice colors

 

[SandShots]

3-4 are great.

 

[seerskater]

thanks guys, im really happy with how sharp these turned out since i didnt have a tripod, i just set my camera on stuff. but i did cheat on the 3rd one with a bit of unsharp mask.

any thoughts of how to one up them?

 

[johngpt]

thanks guys, im really happy with how sharp these turned out since i didnt have a tripod, i just set my camera on stuff. but i did cheat on the 3rd one with a bit of unsharp mask.

any thoughts of how to one up them?

Nothing for #4, it's absolutely stunning, from composition to exposure.

#3, some might say that if one were to utilize the transform tool, holding the command (pc: ctrl) key and pull the upper corners out, to eliminate the converging perspective lines of the buildings, the image would be "better." I'm not so sure it would do anything more for your photo. I like the not so vertical lines of the buildings in your photo.

What are your thoughts regarding what could be better with #s 1 and 2?

 

[seerskater]

john, im not sure what you mean. do you mean crop out the top of the photo and the tops of the buildings?

as for what i would do for 1 and 2, i think in number 2 i would like to have included more of the scene in the picture, especially in the upper and lower registers. some times i think my eye sees things more in a medium-format type format than a 35mm format, but oh well. as for numero uno, it was more of a informal picture, i just snapped the picture of her and i thought it gave a good feeling of how the restaurant felt

 

[zandman]

i like 2 though,

 

[johngpt]

john, im not sure what you mean. do you mean crop out the top of the photo and the tops of the buildings?

as for what i would do for 1 and 2, i think in number 2 i would like to have included more of the scene in the picture, especially in the upper and lower registers. some times i think my eye sees things more in a medium-format type format than a 35mm format, but oh well. as for numero uno, it was more of a informal picture, i just snapped the picture of her and i thought it gave a good feeling of how the restaurant felt

I'm sorry I wasn't clear about what some folks might view as something which could use correcting. You see how in #3, the vertical sides of the buildings sort of converge making the tops of the buildings more narrow than the bases?

In photoshop's free transform, by holding the command key (mac) or the control key (pc) and dragging one of the top corner handles, one can make the vertical lines of the building more vertical. One would make a slight adjustment on the right corner handle, then a minor adjustment on the left corner handle, thereby eliminating that convergence. Then the buildings wouldn't appear more narrow at the top.

Personally, I don't feel that the image needs that correction. I was just mentioning that in critiques of other images, some of those making comments have mentioned correcting that kind of convergence.

I hope I haven't made it more confusing. Knowing how to make that kind of correction is useful not just for shots of buildings, but also when trying to get an image to look as it should to match your creative vision.

Here's a link to a page which has some explanation and keyboard modifiers. Scroll down to Distort and Perspective. Of the six example images, the bottom right one is what I was trying to explain. It widens the top of the image, making those converging lines parallel.

http://www.freetimefoto.com/photoshop/basic/free-transform.html