Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forum Rules
What are the criteria?

FM Forums \| Photo Critique \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 end

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Olmstead does it again! Built in 1900.
Appreciate your critique, fine-tuning suggestions.

Kent: could have used your tilt-shift! Corrected as best as I could in LR.

Scott


	GoetzPhotoz 2012

Canon EOS 5D Mark II 21 mm f/9.5 1/180 sec 100 ISO 0.0 EV

Jul 31, 2012 at 12:17 AM

AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

We're thumbing our noses at "dead center is deadly" are we?

Jul 31, 2012 at 01:10 AM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Yup.
When you've got symmetry you've got to work with it.
Scott

Jul 31, 2012 at 01:11 AM

RustyBug

Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Sometimes "dead center" is "dead on" ... nicely done.

Edited on Jul 31, 2012 at 02:05 AM · View previous versions

Jul 31, 2012 at 02:04 AM

AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

It's got symmetry in spades. Nicely rendered, BTW.

Jul 31, 2012 at 02:04 AM

Camperjim
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

I agree -- very nicely done.

Not much to criticise with this one. I would think about cropping out about half of the blue sky. That would be my style but I am not sure if that would make any significant improvement.

Jul 31, 2012 at 02:18 AM

weissj

Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Gorgeous composure and spot on exposure. A really pleasing image. Well done.

Jul 31, 2012 at 02:23 AM

ben egbert
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

I was wondering what everyone was raving about, Opps, I was in Chrome which messed the sky color. Switched to Safari and now I see, absolutely gorgeous. I also like the symmetry here.

Jul 31, 2012 at 03:07 AM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

RustyBug wrote:
Sometimes "dead center" is "dead on" ... nicely done.

Thanks Kent. Not perfect symmetry but I guess close enough. Sometimes being off a tad in symmetry shots spoils it.
Scott

Jul 31, 2012 at 01:34 PM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

AuntiPode wrote:
It's got symmetry in spades. Nicely rendered, BTW.

Thanks Karen. Glad symmetry is trump in this comp.
Scott

Jul 31, 2012 at 01:34 PM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Camperjim wrote:
I agree -- very nicely done.

Not much to criticise with this one. I would think about cropping out about half of the blue sky. That would be my style but I am not sure if that would make any significant improvement.
I had the same debate. And tried several variations. With the same conclusion: a matter of taste.

Scott

Jul 31, 2012 at 01:35 PM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

weissj wrote:
Gorgeous composure and spot on exposure. A really pleasing image. Well done.
Thanks so much!
Scott

Jul 31, 2012 at 01:35 PM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

ben egbert wrote:
I was wondering what everyone was raving about, Opps, I was in Chrome which messed the sky color. Switched to Safari and now I see, absolutely gorgeous. I also like the symmetry here.

Thanks Ben. Another symmetry fan?
Scott

Jul 31, 2012 at 01:35 PM

RustyBug

Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

sbeme wrote:
RustyBug wrote:
Sometimes "dead center" is "dead on" ... nicely done.

Thanks Kent. Not perfect symmetry but I guess close enough. Sometimes being off a tad in symmetry shots spoils it.
Scott

I picked up on that "not perfect" ... but decided to retract my comment @ it (although Karen was too fast for me to go unnoticed). It was a "micro-nit" that I felt warranted omission. I love our ability to "nit" for (not to be confuse with "at") each other, but I figured you already knew exactly how "perfect" your symmetry was.

I'd say the "tad" does not spoil this one. The only real cues are the lines on the sidewalk and the lamp post orientation, but since they are incidental to the main subject, horseshoes and hand grenades are certainly "close enough" for it to remain as a compelling image. All the "good stuff" totally overpowers the "micro-nit" for me on this one.

Those "V" sidewalks are some awesome leading lines ... I don't think it is possible for anyone to escape them taking you all the way in. The tonal value of the building of course demands you go there, but when you try to "exit" to look at the foreground ... bam, the sidewalk drags you back. Talk about a "moving sidewalk".

"Freaky Good" comp.

Jul 31, 2012 at 01:41 PM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Works better for me cropped just above the wispy cloud on the right. Everything above that is dead space that I don't find is needed for balance: the white building does that.

With it cropped I don't get pulled up past the building into the sky. Instead I hit the building, expore it left and right, go back into the foreground for another look, rinse, repeat....

Yeah it puts the building along the upper 1/3 with the foreground filling the other 2/3 but that usually works when the foreground is more interesting than the sky.

What make this one different than a typical scenic is the large compelling focal point of the buiding. Putting it dead center makes and encouraging the viewer to explore the sky (by showing in in abundance) is done at the expense of time spend down exploring the foreground.

Jul 31, 2012 at 11:16 PM

AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Cropping the sky would make it foreground heavy and lose a portion of the symmetry study.

Jul 31, 2012 at 11:48 PM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

I see symmetry in the building design,.

I see symmetry in the foreground landscaping.

That tends to happen when one aligns the lens axis with a symmetrical builiding, a logical choice here.

I don't see any symmetry in the sky, just a random pattern of clouds. Nor do I see any balance between the "visual mass" of the sky and the foreground the building divides. The attraction of the color contrast of the sky makes the photo top heavy to my eye.

It's a symmetrical compositon but not a static one, as many symmetrical compositons are. That's part of what makes it interesting to look at: the way the eye moves.

In a static composition the eye gets attracted to a stongly contasting single focal point and dwell there because there is no other compelling subordinate focal point to pull it off.

When the eye moves in a photo it's the result of there being some other "visual mass" attracting it. If the secondary focal point has equal visual mass the eye tends to repeatedly bounce between them finding each equally compelling. That's the dynamic in this shot. The building is smaller but brighter than the foreground which gives the two more or less equal visual mass and "gravitatonal" atttraction for my eyes and the brain directiing them.

Composition is the answer to the question, "where do you want the viewer's eye to fixate?"

Here the focal points are building and foreground and the the desided eye movemeent dynamic for me if it was my photo would be having the viewer movng repeatedly between the and not really noticing the sky that adds no interest to the story here.

That's why symmetry (where it exists) is enhanced by cropping the sky to reduce it's attracton to the point of being mimimal so the eye moves between symmetrical building and foreground.

Aug 01, 2012 at 12:22 AM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Interesting discussion about the sky crop.
I decided to keep it as is because I wanted the story also to be how this beautiful structure and garden sit under a large expanse of sky. One of the things that stands out for me about Buffalo is the big sky. Buffalo and much of western NY is very flat. Weather systems roll in and out, largely modified and sometimes created by the Great Lakes. Here Lake Erie is probably two miles away, tops. And I wanted the bright, glistening structure to glow beneath a beautiful blue sky. Tightening the crop from the top would show the structure and foreground garden nicely, but lose the sense of expansive sky and the jewels below.

Scott

Aug 01, 2012 at 12:48 AM

AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #19 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

Foreground is a third. Building a third. Sky a third. It's a three part symmetry.

Aug 01, 2012 at 05:46 AM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · Buffalo and Erie County Botanical Gardens

AuntiPode wrote:
Foreground is a third. Building a third. Sky a third.

True

AuntiPode wrote:
It's a three part symmetry.

False

Symmetry is defined by the traits of equal balance visually and/or similar mirror-image pattern.

The pattern symmetry here is the left <> right mirroring in the building and foreground, not up<>down between the three elements: sky, building, foreground. As for balance? Your eye may find equal balance vertically between the big sky as posted and other two elements but I find the color contrast makes the overall balance top heavy: my eye keeps getting pulled past the buliding into the large gap above it. Gaps in photos invite exploration. If you create one at the top of the photo with the sky the eye will go there—sooner or later—moving off the more important focal points.

The similar mirroring symmetry in the building and foreground connect them. There's no similar pattern connecttion between those two and the sky. The first two are focal points, the sky is not. If there was vertical symmetry the photo would have THREE equally compelling focal points.

It's compelling well executed two-part pattern symmetry under a contrasting, mostly plain blue sky; not three part symmetry. Reducing the size of the "gap" between building and top edge of frame modulates the temptation to wander up off the building into the sky.

The dynamic is similar to seeing a fence blocking your path and slowing down before running into it. The size of the sky gap will control the movement eye up in the frame and how soon it turns back down from building for another look at the foreground. The best way to see this dynamic is crop the sky 3-4 different amounts, then by comparison determine which seems to have the best visual balance. I did it by scrolling the photo in the browser window to compare.

Aug 01, 2012 at 11:10 AM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Photo Critique \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end