Hi, Tim. I'm liking the conversion, but if I'm being honest, I don't like the crop at the top. I studied this image for some time before responding, because I don't like to say I don't care for something without offering an alternative (even if it IS just an opinion!). However, I really don't know how to capture all the elements here without going wider. If your gear list is current, it looks like 17 is as wide as you can go. I guess standing back further to include the top is all I can offer as an alternative. As far as that goes, my personal preference would be to include the top here but crop at the bottom. The individual at the left distracts.
Just my opinion.
am I reading something into the image - is that person lowering their pants
must be my glasses!
image? well the angle is different and maybe too different, as it stops me from really looking at the composition, that the angle is the composition.
great old building; any more shots of it?
regards, tom
Thanks guys. The widest my point and shoot would go is 28mm eq. The other buildings would have made a "block away" shot necessary to grab the entire bldg. The street person had a t shirt hanging out beneath a shorter outer garment. I mistakenly posted the uncloned shot where she and the car were gone. Wasn't a flasher. Thanks for the insightful comments.
Tim ONeill wrote:
Thanks guys. The widest my point and shoot would go is 28mm eq. The other buildings would have made a "block away" shot necessary to grab the entire bldg. The street person had a t shirt hanging out beneath a shorter outer garment. I mistakenly posted the uncloned shot where she and the car were gone. Wasn't a flasher. Thanks for the insightful comments.
That's why you have to lug around the DSLR and shoot at 17mm! I enjoy the textures and the mood of the image you captured, but I wish the composition was a little more to the left, capturing more of the building. But I really like your style Tim, especially your conversions. Keep it up buddy!
