[lovejoy]

I really like this picture. What are your views on it ? I Would like to know where I could improve so that next time i could shoot better. (shot at 18mm, handheld)

Attached Images

 

[JohnBee]

Very dynamic!
I like the colors and lighting in this shot. - great blend

[grainbelt]

What is the subject - the person, the post, or the building?

The person is in the foreground and is in focus, but we can only see his back. The building is quite interesting, but between the truck, the guy, the post, the underside of a tree with red christmas lights, and the power lines, I'm not sure where to look.


I think technically it is a nice exposure, if a bit soft.

[lovejoy]

What is the subject - the person, the post, or the building?

The person is in the foreground and is in focus, but we can only see his back. The building is quite interesting, but between the truck, the guy, the post, the underside of a tree with red christmas lights, and the power lines, I'm not sure where to look.


I think technically it is a nice exposure, if a bit soft.

Actually I was focusing on the building. I know it wud have been great if the guy was out of focus, but I guess I didnt have that much time to think because it wasnt a set up and that guy could have moved. Any tips on how I could have shot it that everything was out of focus/litle blurred out but the building.

Thanks

P.S. - I think it had just rained and I also wanted to capture the reflection off the ground so how could I have framed it differently keeping all that in my mind.

[Schraubstock]

Hi

I can see why you like your shot, it is not a master piece and it does not need to be one. Night shots with wet roads are always good to capture. Certainly the pole and the person could have been better placed but something in the foreground is not a bad thing. It is a bit like some overhanging tree branches that invade the sky at the top of pictures in a "reverse" situation.

Unlike grainbelt's view I come from a different school of thoughts when it comes to street photography. In my view street(scape) photography is only (maybe not only, but greatly) of interest for me when there is a lot to see. After all when you walk through a busy street with lots of activity this is what you see and taking an image of that is what is is all about. And as far as a general street scape shooting is concerned you can stand at the corner for ever waiting for the ideal placement of everything that is happening before your eyes. But to take what you see with as much creativity and artistry as is possible will give street scape photography its appeal, The need for the ever popular focal point, in my impoverished opinion, is sometimes a bit overstated. (In general photography perhaps even). Sometimes to make a viewer think and analyze over a photograph is not such a bad thing. It is a different story when taking particular activities of what is happening on the street like people doing their thing and such where you do need a focal point. Your image is not one of those.

I have stated before, falling lines as a result of wide angel shots where buildings play a part sometimes work and sometimes they don't. At occasions there is no arguing about this matter and at other times it is just a matter of likes or dislikes. I am on the side of straight lines in images such as yours. I have made a correction but it is not meant as a must do correction. I have done this only to offer an alternative to look at, perhaps to canvass peoples opinion.

Corrections like these carry a price tag. You loose part of the picture, which often does not matter, and some parts of the image will loose their shape a bit. (Depending on the severity of the correction.) In my correction you will notice the person in the foreground is much more squat as compared to your original. In your original the elongated shape of the person is perhaps a bit too much (as a result of the wide angel) and in my image perhaps a bit too squat. Anyway by having to trim the sides of the image as a result of the straightening process the image does look a bit taller which in this case may actually work to enhance the picture. (Maybe, maybe not, you'll be the judge)

I hope I have been able to contribute with the above and don't forget it is only my take of the matter.

Greetings

[lovejoy]

Hi

I can see why you like your shot, it is not a master piece and it does not need to be one. Night shots with wet roads are always good to capture. Certainly the pole and the person could have been better placed but something in the foreground is not a bad thing. It is a bit like some overhanging tree branches that invade the sky at the top of pictures in a "reverse" situation.

Unlike grainbelt's view I come from a different school of thoughts when it comes to street photography. In my view street(scape) photography is only (maybe not only, but greatly) of interest for me when there is a lot to see. After all when you walk through a busy street with lots of activity this is what you see and taking an image of that is what is is all about. And as far as a general street scape shooting is concerned you can stand at the corner for ever waiting for the ideal placement of everything that is happening before your eyes. But to take what you see with as much creativity and artistry as is possible will give street scape photography its appeal, The need for the ever popular focal point, in my impoverished opinion, is sometimes a bit overstated. (In general photography perhaps even). Sometimes to make a viewer think and analyze over a photograph is not such a bad thing. It is a different story when taking particular activities of what is happening on the street like people doing their thing and such where you do need a focal point. Your image is not one of those.

I have stated before, falling lines as a result of wide angel shots where buildings play a part sometimes work and sometimes they don't. At occasions there is no arguing about this matter and at other times it is just a matter of likes or dislikes. I am on the side of straight lines in images such as yours. I have made a correction but it is not meant as a must do correction. I have done this only to offer an alternative to look at, perhaps to canvass peoples opinion.

Corrections like these carry a price tag. You loose part of the picture, which often does not matter, and some parts of the image will loose their shape a bit. (Depending on the severity of the correction.) In my correction you will notice the person in the foreground is much more squat as compared to your original. In your original the elongated shape of the person is perhaps a bit too much (as a result of the wide angel) and in my image perhaps a bit too squat. Anyway by having to trim the sides of the image as a result of the straightening process the image does look a bit taller which in this case may actually work to enhance the picture. (Maybe, maybe not, you'll be the judge)

I hope I have been able to contribute with the above and don't forget it is only my take of the matter.

Greetings

Hi Schraubstock,thanks for explaining it nicely. Although the photograph looks a bit stretched out but I think I got your point. I can see with a little change that you made, the frame is looking more filled and the buliding catches more attention than the original one. Next time I will try to shoot a little tight and vertically straight.