#1 for me. It's a million times more striking to my eyes. Some reasoning:
- I'm a b+w geek
- The perspective is far more exciting and draws me in more
- There's room to look around the image without feeling like the subject gets lost
- The b+w makes the street feel much more like a 'location' than 'just some street'
- I like the chap in the b/g. He's not obvious till you look, but adds a sense of reality
- Fantastic sky
1 works better IMO. You get a sense of the scene, composition works well, and the sky is more dramatic. When looking at the 2, my eye stays longer on 1, as it tells more of a story.
Good thread !
It drives home a point to me about my comps and my PP. I tend to zoom and crop to make things closer, just because I get carried away in front of the computer, at the amount of detail in the subject when it's taken well, with a good lens etc...
And I sacrifice the story and context in the process.
As Sahid said, #1 tells the story much better given the context and surroundings. After seeing #1, #2 feels clostrophobic.
I like the B&W conversion & how it makes the sky look more dramatic. I like how the guy is on the right and the girl on the left, as it seems to balance the building heights more to my eye. Also, her stray hair in front of her face in #2 is a bit distracting (nitpick). I also like the wider perspective & think it draws me more to the scene.
Because...
Composition - it's more balanced foreground to background, top to bottom. Although both pics have directionality, the balance of the composition in #1 is stronger and more exciting.
Content - the sweeping scene is more dramatic and adds to the emotion of the photo. Also, there's a lady in blue in #2 in the distance with a plastic bag. To me she's a distracting element that doesn't add to the photo.
Processing - the b+w adds to the drama and storytelling.
On the whole, I just feel that #2 is a so-so picture, while #1 has more elements that make it more compelling to look at.
