Heaton Hall. One from this morning.
- Thread starter Marcel
- Start date
OP
- Messages
- 29,408
- Name
- Marcel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks Joe.
I got some different shots of this, some with the building at the bottom of the shot working its way up. I think this is one of those times when the rule of thirds is to be broken, IMO, although I have situated it above the horizon it's not on a 'third' and I think, personally it also works with the same amounts of grass and sky, thus the centre of the building running dead along the centre of the shot.
I got some different shots of this, some with the building at the bottom of the shot working its way up. I think this is one of those times when the rule of thirds is to be broken, IMO, although I have situated it above the horizon it's not on a 'third' and I think, personally it also works with the same amounts of grass and sky, thus the centre of the building running dead along the centre of the shot.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Adrian's mono version is nice. 
It's a nice shot Bod and well exposed, but over-saturated for my tastes. Upping the stauration is OK for some shots or for a particular effect, but I don't think it's needed here. It's slightly off level which is a little unsettling.
Removing some of the foreground with a slightly more pano crop might emphasise the grandeur of the place?
It's a nice shot Bod and well exposed, but over-saturated for my tastes. Upping the stauration is OK for some shots or for a particular effect, but I don't think it's needed here. It's slightly off level which is a little unsettling.
Removing some of the foreground with a slightly more pano crop might emphasise the grandeur of the place?
S
Steve
Guest
I agree with CT to a point, I personally think the saturation levels where fine considering it was caught in the warm light of the early morning sunrise, it is however slightly off level and the original framing was doing nothing to draw you in to the picture or show the scale of the building.
A panoramic crop (again for me even tighter at the bottom than CT has done) would suit this shot very well, and that crop with Adrians black and white treatment really makes this image look like something special.
Your photography is coming on in leaps and bounds. :thumb:
A panoramic crop (again for me even tighter at the bottom than CT has done) would suit this shot very well, and that crop with Adrians black and white treatment really makes this image look like something special.
Your photography is coming on in leaps and bounds. :thumb:
MattEg
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 2,934
- Name
- Matthew Egan
- Edit My Images
- No
Great shot Marcel, I like the exposure as is.
The warm low light shows the building off how it should, and the sky is perfect.
I agree with the crop, I would take some of from the sides as the bits of building in the shadows don't really add anything to the image.
I would also go for the pano crop, placing the bottom of the building on the lower third.
I'm not one for converting to black and white, unless the subject suits the format, and I don't think B&W does this justice.
The warm low light shows the building off how it should, and the sky is perfect.
I agree with the crop, I would take some of from the sides as the bits of building in the shadows don't really add anything to the image.
I would also go for the pano crop, placing the bottom of the building on the lower third.
I'm not one for converting to black and white, unless the subject suits the format, and I don't think B&W does this justice.
OP
- Messages
- 29,408
- Name
- Marcel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks for the comments people.
Here is another attempt, taking your comments on board.
I think personally this one might be a little 'too' dark/contrasty, however, I prefer this crop.
It is actually taken from another image, where I shot the building at the bottom of the frame to include lots of sky.
Here is another attempt, taking your comments on board.
I think personally this one might be a little 'too' dark/contrasty, however, I prefer this crop.
It is actually taken from another image, where I shot the building at the bottom of the frame to include lots of sky.
OP
- Messages
- 29,408
- Name
- Marcel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks CT
I am beginning to agree with you about the saturation. In the first shot, I upped the saturation to +5 in RSE, but this time actually set it to -2, as it was quite overpowering.
The grass and the sky weren't my main concern, it was the building that was becoming quite orange. Obviously at the time of the shoot it was bathed in very early morning light, but the shot was becoming quite overpowering with it, so I have tried to knock it back a little while still keep it punchy. Obviously goin too far, took that lovely blue emphasis out of the sky, which I was keen to keep.
I'm not sure whether a mono version would work with this crop, although it does work on the first shot posted, due to the vast expanse of grass making the image quite contrasty.
Once again, thanks for your comments, and looking at them, y ou're all right
I am beginning to agree with you about the saturation. In the first shot, I upped the saturation to +5 in RSE, but this time actually set it to -2, as it was quite overpowering.
The grass and the sky weren't my main concern, it was the building that was becoming quite orange. Obviously at the time of the shoot it was bathed in very early morning light, but the shot was becoming quite overpowering with it, so I have tried to knock it back a little while still keep it punchy. Obviously goin too far, took that lovely blue emphasis out of the sky, which I was keen to keep.
I'm not sure whether a mono version would work with this crop, although it does work on the first shot posted, due to the vast expanse of grass making the image quite contrasty.
Once again, thanks for your comments, and looking at them, y ou're all right
