composition and crop

[threelions usa]

of these two which would be the better composition and crop.

the sky i could do nothing about it was a total fog bank (hence the need for the light house i imagine) but i took as much of it out as i could and wondered which would be the better picture. one does give perspective to the huge rock (again need for said structure) but with the fog i am not sure if it helps.

as i am trying hard to work on composition i cropped the rock out and left the power lines and road leading to the lighthouse in to see if that made a better photo.

please feel free to adjust by way of an explanation.

thanks

[poker]

IMO

The pole on the right wasn't doing anything for me and it didn't appear to be one of those things that "bleeds" out of the photo well. There's alot going on the left so I believe a square crop gives enough focus for a well composed shot.

I couldn't help but get rid of the pink sky. Hope you don't mind.

[collargoll]

I'd go for version two without the big rock. If the main focus in this picture is about the lighthouse the big rock is just a disturbing element.

I made a quick and dirty version myself. If you choose to have the pole on the right(you might as well crop it), I have straightened it a bit. Also added a fair bit contrast to the entire picture, and particulary the lighthouse as it is the main focus. Added some saturation and got rid of some of the red/pinkish cast. Finally I sharpened it a bit.

Nice photo, just to bad the sky is completly without details.

[MB1]

I too feel the second one in the better image as it is more focused on fewer elements.

[freygr]

I have to agree that the cropped images are better that either the two you posted. Now if you had images to place the light house in the center of a panorama then the rocks could stay.

[threelions usa]

thanks a lot.

as i said, unfortunately there is nothing i can do about the sky, and i couldn't get close enough to the lighthouse to get better photos.

so it is what it is..HOWEVER, it goes to show what we can do with a crop etc. actually the poles leaning were actually exactly that. i am not sure, although perhaps you are correct it doesn't do a lot extra, sometimes leaning poles are just that. it is an old light house, way south of the big sur and there is NOTHING around for miles. i wish i had taken notes of where it actually is, i can maybe google earth it or similar to actually add a name. there are folks on here i know who traverse that part of the coast and must now it. i think that it is a non functioning one but of course there must be a name somewhere.

so at least next time i have a starter point. move more left find perhaps something further left of the lighthouse actually i think there were some house or similar there. i'll look at my files, but although i am prone to the crop i am not too sure that i like the colouring.

i kinda liked the reddish removed and as there WAS a fog bank i would prefer although perhaps not the best back lit, there is something more about the fog that the too deep a colour.

that raises another question that has been on my mind for a few days now.

when does the photo we took, being changed by photoshop, is is no longer the picture that we took ?

a serious question and one that also sprang to mind when the "straightened pole" came up. it WAS a leaning pole. so although perhaps not quite what we want to make it look my aesthetically pleasing it was still a leaning pole.

it is one that i have been kicking around since i bought photoshop.

i don't mind cleaning up (i.e. shadows etc) but changing the entire complexity of the shot ?

how do you all feel about it ? obviously with the advent of technologly even a digital is more able to change things that a 35 mm, where is the line drawn ?

a serious question that has been REALLY bugging me ....

thanks again..