Results 1 to 7 of 7

200 year old church

This is a discussion on 200 year old church within the Critiques forums, part of the Photography & Fine art photography category; This is in St Gabriel, LA, about 5 minutes from my house Please critique one or the other (or both ...

  1. #1
    theantiquetiger's Avatar
    theantiquetiger is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    2,774
    My Photos
    Please feel free to edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default 200 year old church

    This is in St Gabriel, LA, about 5 minutes from my house

    Please critique one or the other (or both )



    I really like this one with the sun flare. It was not an accident,I did accidentally discover it before shooting, but shot it with the flare on purpose. I posted it on another site, and it was not liked. It was my favorite shot today.


  2. #2
    Mad Aussie's Avatar
    Mad Aussie is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brisbane, Qld, Australia
    Posts
    14,098
    My Photos
    Please ask before editing my photos

    Default

    I like both compositions, in fact you seem to have a good eye for that part of photography at least, which is important.

    The flare doesn't do anything for me, and I do appreciate a good flare shot myself. However, in this case I find it without form and all it's done is create a big distraction that has washed out the photo and doesn't add to the photo itself. Hint ... the higher the f-stop (smaller the aperture), the more likely the flare will take on some shape, like lights at night looking like stars.

    I like the top photo for it's exposure and shadows as well.

  3. #3
    Richard's Avatar
    Richard is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,818
    My Photos
    Please do NOT edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    I can't really add to what MA has already said. shot 1 for me is the stronger shot.

  4. #4
    NorthStone is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    93
    My Photos
    Please ask before editing my photos

    Default

    Nice composition. I agree with Mad Aussie and Richard about shot 1. Shot 1 is definitely stronger and not just because of the absence of the sun flare but because of the depth of the image. The trees either side work well with the church which is the prime subject and the shadows too emphasise the depth. Shot 2 lacks this.

    On the sunflare I'm not a big fan of these and try to get rid of or avoid them altogether in my photos. I take MA's point about flares but I'd rather avoid them.

    BW,
    NorthStone

  5. #5
    Marko's Avatar
    Marko is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Montreal, QC. Canada
    Posts
    14,870
    My Photos
    Please do NOT edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    I have to agree with the others on the flare. It's not adding to the image at all, it's only detracting from it.
    Curious, why do you like it, what do u think it adds?
    - Please connect with me further
    Photo tours of Montreal - Private photography courses
    - Join the new Photography.ca Facebook page
    - Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/markokulik
    - Follow me on Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/0/111159185852360398018/posts
    - Check out the photography podcast


    "You have to milk the cow quite a lot, and get plenty of milk to get a little cheese." Henri Cartier-Bresson from The Decisive Moment.

  6. #6
    theantiquetiger's Avatar
    theantiquetiger is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Posts
    2,774
    My Photos
    Please feel free to edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marko View Post
    I have to agree with the others on the flare. It's not adding to the image at all, it's only detracting from it.
    Curious, why do you like it, what do u think it adds?
    I am not super religious, but to me, it adds kind of a God-like presence to the image. I do agree the First image is 1000x sharper with very clean lines and the 2nd with the flare is washed out in the sky and side of the steeple. Maybe I could try a smaller aperture and get a star flare instead of a wash.

    Over all, I think the flare adds character to the image. It is more than just an image of a church.

    Does this make sense?

  7. #7
    Marko's Avatar
    Marko is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Montreal, QC. Canada
    Posts
    14,870
    My Photos
    Please do NOT edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    Makes sense to me AT, I'm just not seeing what you are seeing/feeling.

    I sort of know what you were going for, but in that case, to me, the flare should be much more on the church as opposed to the tree. It should also "look" like it is there on purpose imo. IMO this looks accidental.
    I say this to MANY members though. Your shot you da boss.
    - Please connect with me further
    Photo tours of Montreal - Private photography courses
    - Join the new Photography.ca Facebook page
    - Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/markokulik
    - Follow me on Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/0/111159185852360398018/posts
    - Check out the photography podcast


    "You have to milk the cow quite a lot, and get plenty of milk to get a little cheese." Henri Cartier-Bresson from The Decisive Moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36