Upload & Sell: Off
Thanks again Camperjim.
Thank you sadja for the suggestion.
Arun, welcome to FM - at least as an active contributor. It didn't hurt too much, did it
I too tend to be a people avoider but in your first shot I thought it was more positive than negative to have them included. It shows that the place being photographed had not been abandoned and still has some life. I'm even inclined to accept the motion blur but note my next paragraph...
The contrast and sharpness are a bit overcooked for my taste. It conveys a brightness in the scene that I think was not really there, which makes it look a bit too artificial, especially in view of the motion blur on the people - that is really only plausible if there is a belief that the scene was sufficiently dark, which contradicts the impression created by the contrast and sharpening levels. Then again, the shading under the windows implies that the scene was reasonably bright.
I'm not too keen on the vignetting at the top but I suspect that it is actually shadow from a roof. Do you have a shot that includes the roof ? Would including a bit of the roof detract from the picture by adding clutter or would it close the top of it ? I suspect it might detract by causing the lower awning to form a line right through the middle of the picture, which is rarely a good thing.
Don't take anything bad or negative from my comments. They are just an example of the variety of thoughts that different viewers can elicit from a single image. Some will be more technical than others, and some more artistic than others. There's no one right way to capture the image.
More generally, I much prefer it when people include some basic EXIF data in or with the shots they post so that (1) we can better imagine how they were captured and perhaps learn from them, and (2) we can better understand whether or not you made a mistake in the capture (such as using too low an ISO, or whatever) and whether or not you had other options available to you (e.g. you might not have been able to increase the ISO and hence the shutter speed).
Thanks for the welcome Alan.
Those are some really good thoughts on that image Alan, but for for me I see that my story is not really conveyed here. . There is no worse than explaining ones own photograph, or for that matter ones own poem, painting or story, I still would like to explain what I saw there.
There are 2 cycles one of them being a ladies one. There are windows in pair with half of the panes open. There are doors in pair. There are 2 floors. There is this nice color pair of yellow and green. I so wished that a human pair would come there to make my image more meaningful. Yes,they came, a tourist couple and the lady is with a headscarf!! What more could you ask for?? Poor &**!!@#@ me.. I wouldn't have learned my new Olympus OM-D perfectly as it is the third day that beast is in my hands. I shot with whatever settings I had and yea, there you get a motion blur with 1/30s. ( Exif is ISO 200 at f/7.1). I am relatively a newbie in photography having owned a pre-used Nikon D70s for the past one year with a nikkor 50/1.8 (Which annoyingly gave me these two habits - shooting at base ISO and never changing the focal length, even though you are using a zoom lens.)
By the way, I like blur when I am shooting people. I am not sure whether it's my incapability to shoot the expressions, but I always find an excuse for blur in their privacy.
What you guessed it correct. Many have suspected it as vingetting.. No, I do not have a shot with the roof, AFAIR it was distracting... As you see from the exif it was sufficiently bright, if not very bright!!
PP all I can say is that my frantic effort to salvage the image - by adding light, saturation and what not- has only worsened the thing.
This is a more normal version of the image here.
Pair by Arun Balagopalan, on Flickr
One more here
Pair2 by Arun Balagopalan, on Flickr
Thanks for stopping by ben egbert. Exif ISO 200, f/7.1, 1/30s