Washington Monument in Early Morning

[cgipson1]

I don't think anyone was suggesting you are a blithering idiot. I certainly wasn't. I was simply agreeing with you that you didn't realize the monument was lit by a number of lights, and that by googling "Washington monument" at night, you'd see several similar photos.

I did find it quite odd that you didn't know what you were looking at, judging by the thread title and how iconic the monument is. But I did not think you were an idiot by any stretch of the imagination.

Nothing against you Tyler. Your comment was not the one that got my Goat.

amolitor - I'm not sure if that was intended to be reassuring, understanding or a cloaked insult... I am both American and English speaking.

That said, that is the first time I have seen that Monument illuminated. To me the illumination makes it look kind of cheesy. With the two big red dots at the top... (not meant as an insult to the work just seemed odd that it wouldn't be presented in a more flattering way 'cause in my mind "that" couldn't be the "Washington Monument") This is why I asked what it was. Also being an American, I know we have a tendency to make Mock monuments as are seen all over Vegas... I was wondering if this was the case here.

Red dots = Aircraft warning lights....

and the monument is white.. and fairly reflective, hence the "glow"

 

[o hey tyler]

"Got my goat." That's one I have never heard. I like it!

 

[vintagesnaps]

In this photo I like the contrast of the monument and the coppery color of the sky. I don't think the monument looks any brighter than the lights along the shore, and a long enough exposure was probably used so it enhanced the brightness of the monument and the sky.

I think the evergreen branch w/the pinecones somewhat frames the shot, but there isn't anything to balance the branch which seems to make for too much space on the right side of the photo. I'd probably try a couple of different crops - the right side maybe just to the right of the small orangish glow in the sky, and another cropping closer to the taller tree along the right side of the skyline. I think I'd like it better with the monument not quite so centered, but it's a beautiful photo that might benefit from some cropping to adjust the balance in the composition.

I haven't been posting on this board very long and already feel like I've read too many threads like this one. I particularly don't understand the way it seems like people new to the board are subjected to a certain amount of derision. I think suggestions or critique can be given in a respectful way but that doesn't necessarily seem to be expected or enforced on here.

Sharon

 

[manaheim]

manaheim, you bully. If you keep driving people off with your vicious attacks, there won't be anyone left here pretty soon.

Photographiend, since you didn't recognize the Washington Monument, I am gonna take a guess that maybe you don't live in the USA, and maybe even english isn't your first language? In any case, I though manaheim's tone was a little rude, but mostly trying to joke around with you a little. Sometimes these things backfire and the other guy just sees an insult, especially if there's a language barrier, but sometimes when there is not.

I know I'm a monster. A cute fuzzy monster.

Photofiend... There were several levels to my comment, but I was mostly joking.

That said, this is the Washington Monument, so yeah... Your not being aware of what was is kinda shocking. Yes, it is a somewhat nondescript obelisk (built intentionally that way, btw) but it is THE somewhat nondescript obelisk. Not recognizing it is akin to not recognizing the Eiffel Tower. Kinda bizarre no matter where you live. Oh and there is also that one little issue of the whole thread being titled WASHINGTON MONUMENT IN EARLY MORNING, which struck me as sort of a dead giveaway. Yeah? No? I dunno. If it was titled ROTTEN CABBAGE HEAD ON THE PLAINS IN SPAIN i could understand the confusion, but... Maybe I'm alone here.

So yeah, I was joking, but yeah I was also making fun of you a little. It wasn't intended in poor spirit, but come on... How can I possibly resist?

You sort of have to understand me and my upbringing to fully get it. My family teases one another mercilessly when they do mildly silly things, and what you did was mildly silly.

If you still take offense at it... Meh. You need to grow a tougher carapace. What I did was NOTHING compared to some of the abuse I see on the Internet for far lesser crimes.

 

[cgipson1]

EVIL BUNNY!

 

[manaheim]

EVIL BUNNY!

Lol need to redo my avatar as a sith.

 

[eswebster]

I love it when people break the rules and others don't get it and have a fit. I think the photo works just fine as presented. I get the visual importance of the branch and the play on symmetry. eswebster's crop follows the rules to a T, but the result couldn't be more cliche. The play between the strong vertical and horizontal just went away. The branch is such a strong visual arrow emphasizing the obnoxiously obvious focal target which is made even more obvious by splitting the horizon in half emhasizing the uber illumnated subject even more. The monument itself broke rules, a neo-egyptian obelisk standing as the tallest structure on earth. This image simply reinforces that. Yes, I like it.

Still learning, so I was just impressed I was able to use the content aware healing tool to remove the tree. Lesson I am taking away is that following rules may be a good guideline but not always appropriate. Thanks for the response and viewpoint texkam.

 

[cgipson1]

I love it when people break the rules and others don't get it and have a fit. I think the photo works just fine as presented. I get the visual importance of the branch and the play on symmetry. eswebster's crop follows the rules to a T, but the result couldn't be more cliche. The play between the strong vertical and horizontal just went away. The branch is such a strong visual arrow emphasizing the obnoxiously obvious focal target which is made even more obvious by splitting the horizon in half emhasizing the uber illumnated subject even more. The monument itself broke rules, a neo-egyptian obelisk standing as the tallest structure on earth. This image simply reinforces that. Yes, I like it.

Still learning, so I was just impressed I was able to use the content aware healing tool to remove the tree. Lesson I am taking away is that following rules may be a good guideline but not always appropriate. Thanks for the response and viewpoint texkam.

The "RULES" are only Guidelines to start with! The trick is knowing when to use them.. and when to break them! lol!

 

[ATVrider43]

I like this photo a lot. I don't know what all the fuss is about.... Its a very well done photo at night of the monument. If I google it, I think your photo is one of the best of the google search, I love the colors and the shadows from the trees and reflections! But this would do it more justice:

 

[Trblmkr]

I have thick skin and had read a few of the forums here before I posted. I take criticism for what it is, someone's opinion. That being said, I'm still learning (obviously) so I look at what everybody has to say and try to understand it from their point of view.

Eswebster (sorry if I got your handle wrong)... thanks for the recropping.

I could have even touched up the lights on top of the monument so they aren't so friggin bright LOL.

Thank you all for looking and at least having an opinion. I'm not going anywhere, yet.

 

[Photographiend]

:love:

Thanks for that guys... sorry for being such a drama queen.

 

[cgipson1]

Evil SITH Bunny! (working with an image this size sucks! lol!)

 

[manaheim]

Evil SITH Bunny! <img src="http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=36921"/> (working with an image this size sucks! lol!)

BAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

[Photographiend]

LMAO... Nice

 

[PropilotBW]

My attempt at a crop.

Nice picture, super sharp.

I have to disagree. This is a horrible crop. The branch needed to be removed, but there is such thing as Symmetrical Art. Not all shots have to use the "rule of thirds". I like the first shot better.