A New Sign - C&C Pls

[Goldcoastgolfer]

After I took that shot of "The Chelsea" cafe sign I thought I'd keep going and see what I could do with some of the places that I visit. The shot below is of the fresh foods market that we frequent. There were some interesting light patterns, lines, and reflections that I thought I saw but I'm struggling to get the perspective I had envisaged. I've distorted the image a bit to try and bring the eye to the sign but I'm not convinced that it works. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Cheers!

[Dave Humphries]

After I took that shot of "The Chelsea" cafe sign I thought I'd keep going and see what I could do with some of the places that I visit. The shot below is of the fresh foods market that we frequent. There were some interesting light patterns, lines, and reflections that I thought I saw but I'm struggling to get the perspective I had envisaged. I've distorted the image a bit to try and bring the eye to the sign but I'm not convinced that it works. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Cheers!

Hi Malcolm,

The first thing that struck me was "what's all the dark blotchy bit?" looking at the triangle formed in top left corner - I think it is the the sky; the bottoms of under exposed/dark clouds, with brighter bits between, but I find it distracting.

The roof, ceiling, window and reflection sort of work, or might better in another shot.

The text is competing 50/50 with the lamps for attention in the last 10% strip of image

Am I correct in assuming that the glass is like a giant (open at bottom) canopy and the lamp supports, which we see behind the glass, are part of the lamps which we see directly as they are below the canopy?

In front of that (a few feet), is the lettering of the sign, stood off from the building on the black square tube framework?
I can't see the EXIF for what aperture was used, but wonder if a shallower DoF would help separate that sign?

In short, there is too much going on - there are about 3 picture opportunities here, but having all three in one image doesn't work. It may not be possible to achieve what you'd like due to the close proximity of the different shapes - shooting on a clear, or bland overcast day would remove reflected clouds from the equation. But the rest, well that's down to the architect; and I'd say s/he wasn't that good, from this angle it has no harmonious style, just 'off the shelf' components bolted together (hope it's not you, never can tell here )

Hope that helps, despite being negative,

[Goldcoastgolfer]

Thanks Dave - it helps a lot and it's not a good shot so the commentary is all constructive . I learn more from my bad shots than the good ones!

I'm not happy with it at all and my first thought was there were too many components in the photo (there's even more in the original!). I shot on f/13 - my original perspective was that the lines of a number of the structures would point to the sign so I was working on getting the background detail. When I brought it up on the screen it was just too busy and every time I cropped elements out the shot just became more and more unbalanced - something to do with the perspective i took it from too I suspect.

The sign is the thing of interest for me right now in terms of the personal project I'm working on so I might go back on a different weekend and try a shallower DOF and just focus on the sign.

I wonder why the EXIF data isn't coming through?

[Dave Humphries]

my original perspective was that the lines of a number of the structures would point to the sign so I was working on getting the background detail

A bit of messin'



Crop and warp

- or "peek and weep"

[Goldcoastgolfer]

Not quite the perspective I was hoping for. Nice attempt of fixing up a bad photo though