I guess this is a landscape... In portrait mode hah or is it cityscape ;)

[Starskream666]

I quite liked it anyway

 

[Starskream666]

Portrait composition* Manual mode hah

 

[Starskream666]

feedback?

 

[spacefuzz]

definitely a cityscape. The building is interesting by the tree branch in the upper left bothers me.

 

[amolitor]

It doesn't do anything for me. It's a building. There's a river. Why do I care? What should I even be looking at in this frame?

 

[WesternGuy]

Does nothing for me - its a building with a tower and a tree in front of it. What's the building?

WesternGuy

 

[FanBoy]

I would have concentrated on framing the tower with branches for this composition.

 

[ceeboy14]

And, you have tons of chromatic abberation to add to it's justabuildingsometreesandariver.

 

[Rick58]

Sorry. I see what you were trying to do with the framing and all, but I'm afraid it's not working.

 

[Starskream666]

Lol 'its just' a building, what else would it be in a cityscape? I don't take many cityscapes but i'm guessing buildings are what the focal point is so that is what you're meant to be looking at obviously, hence the framing of branches to leave the top of the tower in the open for you to look at.

Fanboy is that meant to be a joke? because thats what I did.

And i don't think i can do anything about chromatic aberration?

cheers for feedback

 

[FanBoy]

Fanboy is that meant to be a joke? because thats what I did.

You framed the building, the tower and river with branches. Some branches are in focus, some are not and that's where the image really suffers.

Your subject has potential!

 

[Rick58]

I have to say, I agree with Fanboy. The branch in the upper left foreground hit me like a brick. It appears to have motion blur. Others are simply OOF while still others are razor sharp.
The building is what it is. It's a well exposed, properly focused PART of a building with an interesting steeple. A tighter crop focusing on the steeple alone would have made a much more interesting shot.
I have no problem with record shots of interesting buildings. In fact, I enjoy them. But to be a GOOD record shot you must show the entire structure.
Well framed partical shots fall more into the art side of photography. Unfortunately, this one falls short of that category also. This leaves you in limbo with a relatively uninteresting photo.
Give it another go.

 

[Starskream666]

Constructive, thanks, actually explained what you mean and I get it

 

[ceeboy14]

You can make significant corrections to chromatic abberation in many PP programs. If you shoot in RAW, the Raw editor has a place for lens correction and within that dialogue, a checkbox for removal of said color ghosting.

 

[ceeboy14]

I think, and I cannot speak for anyone else, I failed you in my response because I gave you no alternatives as to how to improve the shot. This edit is strictly a possibility should you be able to do a reshoot at this location. I expanded on your portrait orientation by using a 16:9 format, and thus removing a lot of the extraneous tree limbs, etc. The rest of the correction was done with some quick cloning. Where I see a lot of the failing of a successful image comes from not taking care about your surroundings, significant chromatic abberation and an image way oversharpened.

I still used the trees to frame, but in addition, I added a slight vignette to help contain the eye to the centermost area of the image. this was a very small image to work with and would suggest posting a bit larger - 1024 on the long side.