Greenfield Village

[Devinhullphoto]

Here are a few shots from my trip to Detroit this weekend.

Awesome place to visit if you have never been.

 

[Devinhullphoto]

Anybody?

 

[Buckster]

One of my favorite places, along with the museum and the IMAX theater there which, for my money, is the THE SINGLE BEST IMAX theater anywhere, and I've been to a bunch of them all over the U.S. I saw the new Star Trek movie in 3D there a few weeks ago, and it just blew me away!! Planning to see the new Superman movie in 3D there next week, and can hardly wait. (ETA: turns out today's the last day it's playing there, so I won't make it. )

I used to buy yearly passes to the museum and GV for myself and my daughter, but now live just a bit too far away to take full advantage of them anymore.

Anyway, in all honesty the photos themselves aren't doing a whole lot for me, even though they jog my memory to the many good times I've had there. I recognize and am familiar with all the subjects, and have shots of I think all of them as well. The compositions themselves are okay, but nothing really to write home about, IMHO.

It's the post processing that really isn't going over for me though. It's sort of buried the photos, and is making the post-processing itself the subject. It's difficult to see past it to the photos themselves, if you know what I mean. Most of it seems "muddy" to me from the overabundance of mid-tones. My "opinions" are:

Edison's lab and the machine shop photos need more contrast and edge detail, and way less on the mid-tones. The bike rider and statue of Henry, on the other hand, are way too dark to fully appreciate the subjects in them. Including so much sky but cutting off the woman's feet in the factory photo was not a good way to frame that image, in my opinion. The Dutch windmill shot has that muddy mid-tone dominance thing going again. The tall windmill looks tilted or skewed or something. The Wright Bros shop with the Model T is okay, but not really an attention-holder either. The tones of the church shot seem okay, but there's way too much uninteresting sky from my point of view - like the entire upper half of the composition - personally, I'd crop the snot out of it. The guy on the horse is probably the best of the lot, from my point of view, but would be even better if he was sharper and better isolated from the busy background, where it almost looks like the focus went to the house instead of the man.

Don't mean to disappoint, but that's my honest opinion, and that's all it is - one opinion.

 

[Devinhullphoto]

One of my favorite places, along with the museum and the IMAX theater there which, for my money, is the THE SINGLE BEST IMAX theater anywhere, and I've been to a bunch of them all over the U.S. I saw the new Star Trek movie in 3D there a few weeks ago, and it just blew me away!! Planning to see the new Superman movie in 3D there next week, and can hardly wait. I used to buy yearly passes to the museum and GV for myself and my daughter, but now live just a bit too far away to take full advantage of them anymore.

Anyway, in all honesty the photos themselves aren't doing a whole lot for me, even though they jog my memory to the many good times I've had there. I recognize and am familiar with all the subjects, and have shots of I think all of them as well. The compositions themselves are okay, but nothing really to write home about, IMHO.

It's the post processing that really isn't going over for me though. It's sort of buried the photos, and is making the post-processing itself the subject. It's difficult to see past it to the photos themselves, if you know what I mean. Most of it seems "muddy" to me from the overabundance of mid-tones. My "opinions" are:

Edison's lab and the machine shop photos need more contrast and edge detail, and way less on the mid-tones. The bike rider and statue of Henry, on the other hand, are way too dark to fully appreciate the subjects in them. Including so much sky but cutting off the woman's feet in the factory photo was not a good way to frame that image, in my opinion. The Dutch windmill shot has that muddy mid-tone dominance thing going again. The tall windmill looks tilted or skewed or something. The Wright Bros shop with the Model T is okay, but not really an attention-holder either. The tones of the church shot seem okay, but there's way too much uninteresting sky from my point of view - like the entire upper half of the composition - personally, I'd crop the snot out of it. The guy on the horse is probably the best of the lot, from my point of view, but would be even better if he was sharper and better isolated from the busy background, where it almost looks like the focus went to the house instead of the man.

Don't mean to disappoint, but that's my honest opinion, and that's all it is - one opinion.

Thanks for your input.

Quite a few of them are HDR photos. The statue one is an hdr and I'm sure I could easily go back and make Henry not as dark. The Edison lab shot I can see what you mean. It was an hdr as well and it has way to many mids in it.

Ask for the sky in my shots. I don't know why but I've always enjoyed showing a lot of sky in a shot because I personally love looking at the sky.

 

[Buckster]

Thanks for your input.

Quite a few of them are HDR photos. The statue one is an hdr and I'm sure I could easily go back and make Henry not as dark. The Edison lab shot I can see what you mean. It was an hdr as well and it has way to many mods in it.

Ask for the sky in my shots. I don't know why but I've always enjoyed showing a lot of sky in a shot because I personally love looking at the sky.

That's cool.

I think, in the end, you gotta do what's right for YOU. While I think it can be interesting and somewhat beneficial to know what others think of my work, it seldom actually influences me to change what I'm doing in any way, tbh. Whether folks like or dislike it, whether I agree with them or not, I thank them for taking the time and making the effort to look and give me their honest thoughts, then I continue down my own path.

Of course, when a client wants something in particular; Say, a particular look, like a corporate head shot with a particular background and style that fits in with the other shots their company already uses, I oblige them. It's not that I don't know how to mold and conform my photography to conventional standards or particular looks, just that I'm not terribly interested in doing so for it's own sake or to better "fit in" so as to "buy" acceptance from others. Paying clients get what they paid for. Beyond that, I'm not beholding to anyone else's vision.

So when I'm shooting and processing for my own satisfaction, which is most of the time, I just go with my own guts, whether that fits anyone else's idea of conventional, good, bad, right, wrong, beautiful, ugly, or whatever. It just doesn't matter much to me if it fits with what others deem acceptable or not, as long as I'm happy with it.

That's why I stress that my critique is "just one opinion".

 

[Devinhullphoto]

That's cool.

So when I'm shooting and processing for my own satisfaction, which is most of the time, I just go with my own guts, whether that fits anyone else's idea of conventional, good, bad, right, wrong, beautiful, ugly, or whatever. It just doesn't matter much to me if it fits with what others deem acceptable or not, as long as I'm happy with it.

That's why I stress that my critique is "just one opinion".

I understood it was an option but as you said it is nice to hear options from people you know. Thanks for the input though.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I find that I notice the processing too much so for me that distracts from the photos. I like the use of a lot of sky in the second one because it's a large scene that seems to be able to balance with it, and the sky is part of what was happening - that one would probably work better in a larger size than what is shown here on a message board, I could see that possibly as a large print.

I like the use of the sky in the photo of the statue because it has contrast and pattern with the blue sky and white clouds; seems like including a lot of the sky works better when there's something about it that is part of the photo. In that sort of lighting I may aim the camera somewhat downward more directly at the statue, to determine settings for a proper exposure, then reframe the shot to include the sky. Or from a different angle it could be adjusted to be a silhouette but I don't think that would work with the building in the background.

I like the high wheeler, I just might have though about less foreground to get rid of the sewer grate. Same with the bike shop, I don't know that you need so much space to the right including the fence, and I'd crop just enough on the left to get rid of the leaf sticking into the edge of the picture. The windmill photo might work better either with more of the fence showing to frame it or without the edge of the fence so the viewer's attention might be brought in more to the windmill. Same with the other one, I'd crop it to get the sidewalk out of the picture because I feel like the line attracts my eyes along it instead of the windmill leading me in to the picture and to the top.

I've been there, when I was a kid, but don't remember much, just a vague memory of the village. I have a feeling it changed a lot since then!
.

 

[Stevepwns]

I like them, they are alittle soft for my taste, but I like the HDR look. Well done IMO

 

[Devinhullphoto]

I like them, they are alittle soft for my taste, but I like the HDR look. Well done IMO

Thanks! All of the hdr work was handheld but with enough light that isn't hard

 

[terri]

I love Greenfield Village, and I've been there many times, although it's been a few years now since my last visit.

Unfortunately, I must agree with the others that these images are more about the processing and less about the subject matter - although I am very fond of the subject matter! Not a big fan of HDR, however. Again, just personal preference.

 

[ktan7]

Love your photos. Edit looks pretty cool as well.