"Away"

[Chris Kresser]

Hello,

All feedback is welcome, but in particular I'd be interested in any visceral or emotional reactions this picture evokes in you. Does it move you in any way? If so, how? I'd also like to know what your eye is drawn to first and how that affects your overall impression of the image. Finally, and thoughts you have on composition, form and any particular passages in the picture that stand out are appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Chris

 

[Sean DeMerchant]

Hello,

All feedback is welcome, but in particular I'd be interested in any visceral or emotional reactions this picture evokes in you. Does it move you in any way? If so, how? I'd also like to know what your eye is drawn to first and how that affects your overall impression of the image. Finally, and thoughts you have on composition, form and any particular passages in the picture that stand out are appreciated.

My visceral reaction is that I see the dark area at right, then the light post, then I note the overall composition with strong dark areas (already noted) that lead my eyes right out of the frame. So without adding some text (i.e., adding some additional graphic design and content) the composition fails for me. While this is a negative response, hopefully you find it constructive.

enjoy your day, <smile>

Sean

 

[Chris Kresser]

My visceral reaction is that I see the dark area at right, then the light post, then I note the overall composition with strong dark areas (already noted) that lead my eyes right out of the frame. So without adding some text (i.e., adding some additional graphic design and content) the composition fails for me. While this is a negative response, hopefully you find it constructive.

enjoy your day, <smile>

Sean

Sean,

I'm grateful for your feedback, especially because you explained clearly why the image doesn't work for you. In my mind, feedback is neither "positive" nor "negative" - it's just feedback. It's up to the artist to decide what - if anything - to do with it.

Best,
Chris

 

[Colleen Vermillion]

The street lamp grabs me first and I probably wouldn't have noticed the bird if I didn't know the title of the photo. I do like the line of the buildings on the left and agree that the dark on the right is too overpowering. I wish the bird were positioned differently, but I don't know exactly how.


-Colleen

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hello,

All feedback is welcome, but in particular I'd be interested in any visceral or emotional reactions this picture evokes in you. Does it move you in any way? If so, how? I'd also like to know what your eye is drawn to first and how that affects your overall impression of the image. Finally, and thoughts you have on composition, form and any particular passages in the picture that stand out are appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Chris

Chris,

If the picture was more grainy, I'd think that Alfred Hitchcock, himself, was behind the camera in the shadows, for the mood is grim. The buildings tilt to the left and the bird too has some purpose going that direction. I'm uncomfortable and even annoyed that I don't see what's below the frame. This makes me insecure.

Once we are faced with this negative visual presence and sensory aura that follows, we look around and ask what is it at its roots. The darkness and height of the building remind us of a metropolis like Batman's city. We are at such a time here in this area where space has grown precious and the society has become vertical with powerful people on top and people below serving them. There is jealousy, competition and constant danger.

This picture is one of disorder. It works if what I have described was the intent and if so, I'd consider a vertical framing, since a key to such pictures, is the negative overpowering dominance of the multistory society, that, with the shadows, seems oppressive.

Technically, the sky and the architecture on not optimized for tonalities to show dimensionality, and if that was done, it would be interesting to see any changes in its emotional effect.

Thanks for sharing

Asher

 

[Chris Kresser]

The street lamp grabs me first and I probably wouldn't have noticed the bird if I didn't know the title of the photo. I do like the line of the buildings on the left and agree that the dark on the right is too overpowering. I wish the bird were positioned differently, but I don't know exactly how.


-Colleen

Colleen,

Thanks for sharing your reactions to the picture and your feedback.

Best,
Chris

 

[Sean DeMerchant]

Technically, the sky and the architecture on not optimized for tonalities to show dimensionality, and if that was done, it would be interesting to see any changes in its emotional effect.

A light (~10-30%) wide radius sharpen (30-150+ pixels wide) tends to enhance localized contrast and increase perceived dimensionality for most scenes. And it tends to do exceptionally well IMO for urban scenes (especially skylines).

a thought,

Sean

 

[Chris Kresser]

Chris,

If the picture was more grainy, I'd think that Alfred Hitchcock, himself, was behind the camera in the shadows, for the mood is grim. The buildings tilt to the left and the bird too has some purpose going that direction. I'm uncomfortable and even annoyed that I don't see what's below the frame. This makes me insecure.

Once we are faced with this negative visual presence and sensory aura that follows, we look around and ask what is it at its roots. The darkness and height of the building remind us of a metropolis like Batman's city. We are at such a time here in this area where space has grown precious and the society has become vertical with powerful people on top and people below serving them. There is jealousy, competition and constant danger.

This picture is one of disorder. It works if what I have described was the intent and if so, I'd consider a vertical framing, since a key to such pictures, is the negative overpowering dominance of the multistory society, that, with the shadows, seems oppressive.

Technically, the sky and the architecture on not optimized for tonalities to show dimensionality, and if that was done, it would be interesting to see any changes in its emotional effect.

Thanks for sharing

Asher

Asher,

You have described very eloquently in words what my visual intent was with this picture. I often feel a sense of alienation, isolation and overpowering oppression in the city. The towering and dark buildings symbolize this for me. And yet, that sense of doom is almost always juxtaposed with feeliings of hope, possibility and potential. This is symbolized by the lamp, ready to shine light into the darkness, and the bird, escaping into the blue sky above.

I agree that a vertical framing would have been optimal. Unfortunately my first reflex was horizontal, and the bird was gone before I could take another.

I appreciate your suggestion about optimizing the tonalities of the buildings. I went for a high-contrast "print" believing that would increase the emotional tension in the picture, but I'm curious to see what happens if I create a smoother transition between the tones in the buildings and those in the lamp, sky, etc.

I'm grateful for your thorough and illuminating response, Asher.

Best,
Chris

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi Chris,

I am a little late to the party, but I'll just give you my feedback anyway.

My eyes settle, every time I look, on two focal points in this picture: the lantern and the bird. I am not bothered so much about the dark partition on the right hand side. But my look really wants to follow down the picture a bit more towards the street level. It then seems as if the picture has been abruptly cut/discontinued whereas there could have been more to see.

I don't get the message of "escapism" in the form of the bird. It does not give me the impression that it is escaping anything at all. More like a predator circling the street to find some prey.

Thanks for showing and asking .

 

[Sean DeMerchant]

My visceral reaction is that I see the dark area at right, then the light post, then I note the overall composition with strong dark areas (already noted) that lead my eyes right out of the frame.

I should be more honest here. After noting the dark areas (right and lamppost) my eyes then note the arrow of light which leads my eyes out of the frame.

For working on this type of visceral reaction in composition I find the photography literature lacking and over-simplistic. The photography literature tends to have very little discussion of composition per se and instead discusses motifs for images. I would suggest looking at the graphic design literature for discussion of manipulating the eyes to an end. Dodging and burning is a technique that is often used to control the flow of the eyes.

As Asher noted, rerendering the tonalities can change depth. Removing some of the vignetting also helped draw the eyes into the frame more.

​

I should note I took care to recalibrate my displays before making tonality changes here as an uncalibrated display can throw one way off target.

more thoughts,

Sean

 

[Dierk Haasis]

If the picture was more grainy, I'd think that Alfred Hitchcock, himself, was behind the camera in the shadows, for the mood is grim.

Curious, the first thought in my mind was: Blade Runner.







BTW, Alfred Hitchcock was never behind the camera, he gloated over how to assemble the pieces of a movie before filming starts. One often rehashed complaint by actors about him was that he was sleeping in his trailer while the film was shot.

 

[Chris Kresser]

Thanks to everyone for your feedback, constructive criticism and suggestions for improving the image. I appreciated all of your comments, and found them to be very illuminating.

Warmly,
Chris

 

[Mike Shimwell]

Chris

I liked this. The image has a grainy feel even at that small size, perhaps that is needed for it to work. In terms of light I understood what you are saying - even without the bird - but I suspect that the 'heavy' grey look would be difficult to carry off in a print? Also, although at screen size the dark area to the right doesn't distract me I might view it as being a bit overpowering in a large print.

I'm not so sure about the lack of street or a vertical composition, but it might help root the image.

Just a few late thoughts - sorry I've been a bit busy.

Mike

 

[Chris Kresser]

Chris

I liked this. The image has a grainy feel even at that small size, perhaps that is needed for it to work. In terms of light I understood what you are saying - even without the bird - but I suspect that the 'heavy' grey look would be difficult to carry off in a print? Also, although at screen size the dark area to the right doesn't distract me I might view it as being a bit overpowering in a large print.

I'm not so sure about the lack of street or a vertical composition, but it might help root the image.

Just a few late thoughts - sorry I've been a bit busy.

Mike

Mike,

You make a good point - I would likely have to shift the tonalities quite a bit if I printed this. I haven't yet, but it will make a good experiment.

It probably feels somewhat grainy because it's a small-sensor camera (GX100). I'm really enjoying the way it draws pictures like this.

I appreciate you taking the time to give feedback. Not late at all.

Best,
Chris

 

[Mike Shimwell]

Hi Chris

I've been enjoying a GX100 as well - so much so that I've an idea for a slightly longer post floating around for when I've got a few more minutes to write it down. The drawing is really vary different from a full frame dslr

Mike