xtoph
Veteran Member
i agree with al that #2 is preferable to #1. i think you can can do better though.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
--
Al, compared with EE you've gone out of your way to highlight the difference between the boy and the statues and force us to see and impose the similarities. This separaton is done by lighting, sense of motion, color, relative size. In EE's great shot we easily see what he's up to and smile along with him. In your shot, we say to ourselves, yes, there is a similarity, but it's just a little bit artificieal, the statues are hard to make out and PP is, if anything, undermines the similarity.
------
al
Frank
All photos shot in downtown Manhattan unless otherwise noted.
Thanks in advance for the kindness of your comments or critiques.
thank you frank.Girl, bike, sculpture are an excellent catch.
there is detail throughout the frame on the monitors i am looking at, but i take your point that the right side could be brighter and the left edge darkened. i have been fiddling with it a bit along those lines--the version posted is virtually unedited, just some global contrast tweaks, as most of the pictures i post here are. i do think it will look better.Woman on the right could provide balance, and the color of her jeans and her coat can fit the schema. But she is too dark and that repels the eye, which is drawn to the masonry floor and wall on the left.
The brightness of the background on the left gives that area a sense of depth that seems artificial next to the extreme darkness on the right.
... I would consider greatly reducing the masonry on left and bottom and very carefully lightening the right to create balance and let the eye rest comfortably on the two central figures, the bike and sculpture. The dramatic dark and light schema, without interesting detail, fights against the fascinating and evocative capture.
Frank,Al, compared with EE you've gone out of your way to highlight the difference between the boy and the statues and force us to see and impose the similarities. This separaton is done by lighting, sense of motion, color, relative size. In EE's great shot we easily see what he's up to and smile along with him. In your shot, we say to ourselves, yes, there is a similarity, but it's just a little bit artificieal, the statues are hard to make out and PP is, if anything, undermines the similarity.
In EE, in addition to smiling, there is a sense of wonder at bridging time. Here, the photo seems to see the similarity as fairly incidental and drags us into the current moment --yes, there are gods and ancestors, but they are very distant and not much worth paying attention to. It is the vigor of the child, in his silly superhero costume, that engages the child, not the formal similarity.
The statues are mere ghosts proceeding out of the child's head.
It was valid on the fly..well done, al. so well seen and composed on the fly. impressive.
I like the RGB, the cups, the cakes. the ladies, the man's hands. Someone should have told the man that his shirt could have been improved. I'd think about cropping off the right.
----
al