Please post no more than five images a day and respond to as many images as you post. Critics, please be constructive, specific, and nice! Moderated by gahspidy and mtbbrian.
By posting on the Photo Critique forum you agree to post only your own photos, be respectful, and give back as much as you receive. This is a moderated forum and anything abusive or
off-topic will be removed.
Is it post processing that caused the halo around the buildings?
I like the tonal quality of the photo but the haloing spoils it for me. I like the composition but it just does not say snow melt to me.
What are the white patchess on the building on the left - I suggest a clone of these areas woudl be preferable as they look odd at the moment.
Sorry to be so harsh but I think this could be an excellent photo with a bit more work.
Roger
"I hope we will never see the day when photo shops sell little schema grills to clamp onto our viewfinders; and the Golden Rule will never be found etched on our ground glass."from The mind's eye by Henri Cartier-Bresson
My Web Site: www.readingr.com DSLR
Canon 5D; EF100-400 F4.5-5.6L IS USM; EF24-70 F2.8L USM 50mm F1.8 II; EF 100 F2.8 Macro Digital
Canon Powershot Pro 1; Canon Ixus 100
DRG - A bit of deceptive advertising here. Well, not technically, but I guess I was expecting more snow in the picture This photo is 99 and 44/100 % architectural. As far as that goes, I find the strange tonal values distracting. The buildings themselves are ok, but the sky having the same tone and the glow around the buildings is just too weird. Now if the subject was a statue of Venus or Zeus or something, I think the effect would work. But these buildings dont have much to them - they're sort of plain. The photo therefore seems to lack a subject.
Like Roger said, sorry to be a little harsh here. It was an expt worth trying.
I like the lines that the buildings roofs form in the sky and the tones are pleasing, but I agree with the other comments about the halos near the edges of the roof lines. It looks over processed .
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
This photo is 99 and 44/100 % architectural. As far as that goes, I find the strange tonal values distracting. The buildings themselves are ok, but the sky having the same tone and the glow around the buildings is just too weird. Now if the subject was a statue of Venus or Zeus or something, I think the effect would work. But these buildings dont have much to them - they're sort of plain. The photo therefore seems to lack a subject. 
