Its an interesting and beautiful structure. As "posed" it doesnt do much for me other than documenting it. The angle/lens makes it appear to lean away from the adjacent column.
Not sure what are the best options to add interest. There isnt a perceived story line.
Shooting super wide super close from the floor up might add a bit of drama, although the round opening might be obscured by the belly. Or from a ladder, shooting close, wide and down might offer an interesting perspective.
Scott
AuntiPode wrote:
Doesn't seem to be performing a function other than limiting egress from the right side of the pew - leaving it to stand as an oddity.
Might be more interesting is shot from closer and a less conventional angle.
Good observation, yes, placed as ornaments and certainly not functional.
Not happy with the angle myself but doubt I'll ever have a opportunity for a re-shoot.
sbeme wrote:
Its an interesting and beautiful structure. As "posed" it doesnt do much for me other than documenting it. The angle/lens makes it appear to lean away from the adjacent column.
Not sure what are the best options to add interest. There isnt a perceived story line.
Shooting super wide super close from the floor up might add a bit of drama, although the round opening might be obscured by the belly. Or from a ladder, shooting close, wide and down might offer an interesting perspective.
Scott
Thanks Scott,
Perhaps tighter would have been better. And, the building ~1780 (history here for anyone interested) cozy itself. That said, I should have thought more about this before pulling the trigger.
dmacmillan wrote:
Where's the green light coming from?
Good point Doug. I noticed it after posting, also when toning in Silver Efex Pro point in the workflow seems to matter. I'll see if I can sort this out.
Kent's color version is both surprising and interesting.
But I think the sepia conversion pulls the image together and adds an appropriate aged feel. I now find the image more engaging.
sbeme wrote:
Kent's color version is both surprising and interesting.
But I think the sepia conversion pulls the image together and adds an appropriate aged feel. I now find the image more engaging.
Scott
Agree, his sepia version makes a significant difference.
My first thoughts on this one was "does not work" ... then just started playing with it. Sometimes it is interesting where you "wind up" when you don't "give up".
Seems to be another one of those captures where the shooter saw something (vision) that the camera didn't. It might require some coaxing to get it where you want it, but without the capture, it wouldn't even exist.
AuntiPode wrote:
Or perhaps some Silver Efex Pro twiddling....
Auntipode, I like the looks of your version. I like the scratches on the floor near the feet of the stove. I hadn't really noticed those before. You brought out that detail while you maintained the appropriate exposure/contrast in the rest of the photo.
Haven't read all the comment and looked at the edit closely. My impression of the photo as originally presented is that it's an interesting part of richer story that isn't being told effectively by the amount of context shown and the lack of detail in the stove.
It would work better as part of a sequence like this:
1) Wide shot exterior with signage to reveal location / age / historical significance as in the link.
2) Wide shot of interior where stove is seen and put in context with the scale of the interior
3) Shot of the stove, better exposed to show the detail in a tighter crop showing just the stove without the competing distractions in the background.
The exposure problem of scene range exceeding sensor is exacerbated by the attempt to get the stove and the location context into one shot and it falls short on both counts for me. By showing it as part of a two shots series underexposing the stove isn't as critical in wide shot #2 in my hypothetical scenario, and blowing the highlights in the background in the closer shot you could take after establishing context with the first two. The first shot suggested the exterior, is just a way to add more interest and context to the story.
Given the time and opportunity shoot all three and several more POV and then pick, trying to see them from the eyes of a stranger not your context of having been there in person. Forced to pick one of the three in my hypothetical scenario I'd pick #2 over your shot as presented because the entire context of the church interior would be more interesting to me, not having been there.
Thanks for opening the door to a new perspective, too often I'm a one-and-done shooter. And, frankly, I've never sought to tell a story. Time to expand my horizons.
