Abstract Sculpture

[Snarkbyte]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the forum...
I've been out for a few weeks, just busy attending to some real-world issues (nothing tragic, just stuff that needed doing). I notice a few changes have been incorporated into the site in the meantime, and the differences I've seen so far are very nice... nice work, admins, take a bow!

I did manage to get a few shots in the interim, but I'll start the new year with some of today's shots of a modern sculpture in front of the municipal library downtown. C&C is always welcome and appreciated.

#1


#2: B&W rendition of previous photo


#3: Same sculpture, different angle. I liked this shot at first, but the more I look at it, the more it loses it's appeal. Comments?

[Shadowman]

I like the colorful versions best, the black and white suffers from lack of differentiation between tones, but it (the B&W) version looks interesting as well.

[Rob Douglas]

I like #1 being close enough to get the detail of the texture of the metal but it kind of leaves me wanting to see more of this grand sculpture.

[Goldcoastgolfer]

I think each photo has individual strengths. The bold colour contrasts of #1 and #3 are great which I think you lose in the B&W. I like the close up of #1 although it seems a touch dark on the right side to me compared to the left (in that regard I think the B&W works better). The lighting in #3 is more even to me but I miss the detail you get in the first 2.

I enjoyed viewing all of them though - all of the are great captures

[Ryogenetic]

Those are great I like the BW best. I like the last one with a different angle.

Ryo

[Snarkbyte]

Thanks for the replies, everyone.
@Rob: There really aren't many good angles for shooting this sculpture in it's entirety (the backgrounds are terrible), but it's really about relations of various parts to each other, anyway. The piece has many different angles tempting for photos, so I expect I'll revisit this in the near future at a different time of day for lighting.

Here's a different take on the B&W rendition:

[Rob Douglas]

Al, what lens are you using? Just curious cause I like the really low POV you shot at. It's an interesting angle on an interesting piece of art. I'm wondering if shooting it vertically it would be possible to get as much of it in frame from side to side, without picking up any of the distracting background you mentioned, then compose the shot up or down to fill the frame as much as possible. A wide or ultra wide angle lens just might get the whole think top to bottom. Plus you could always crop the side to if you composed the shot to fill the frame top to bottom. Just a thought.

[Snarkbyte]

Al, what lens are you using? Just curious cause I like the really low POV you shot at. It's an interesting angle on an interesting piece of art. I'm wondering if shooting it vertically it would be possible to get as much of it in frame from side to side, without picking up any of the distracting background you mentioned, then compose the shot up or down to fill the frame as much as possible. A wide or ultra wide angle lens just might get the whole think top to bottom. Plus you could always crop the side to if you composed the shot to fill the frame top to bottom.

This was shot with the Canon EF-S 15-85mm lens mounted on a Canon 7D. What you suggest is certainly possible... the sculpture is really built on top of 4 vertical I-beams at the corners, about 8 ft. high. I may revisit the shot soon, and try to get the entire piece, but sometimes leaving the viewer "wanting more" is a good thing.

[Donald]

Al - Welcome back. You disappeared just after I posted up your 'In conversation with .......', which has been read by 180 people so far.

Wonderfully strong lines and shapes in these images. I like the way you've dealt with the light on both the B & W versions.

[Goldcoastgolfer]

Thanks for the replies, everyone.
@Rob: There really aren't many good angles for shooting this sculpture in it's entirety (the backgrounds are terrible), but it's really about relations of various parts to each other, anyway. The piece has many different angles tempting for photos, so I expect I'll revisit this in the near future at a different time of day for lighting.

Here's a different take on the B&W rendition:

This version I really do like - although I can't say why

[Snarkbyte]

@Don: Thanks, great to be able to get back to photography and CiC. I really like some of the updates that have been made in the interim; very clean and modern look and feel.
@Malcolm: I worked on it a bit after your earlier comment, and you were right... I like the 2nd version better, myself. Thanks for the comments!

[Snarkbyte]

For Don and Malcolm: I posted a shot of the entire sculpture in my "Project 52" thread, but just in case you're not following that thread, here's the shot. As I said in the other thread, I don't care much for this shot, I don't think this sculpture was ever really intended for wide angle, either photographically or viewing in person.

[Snarkbyte]

Previously, I deliberately framed the shots of this piece to include only the sculpture, but here I tried to include the surrounding buildings as part of the composition. I think it works fairly well, but the antenna on top of the building on the right should probably be removed. It's a little nit-picky, and some people object to that sort of alteration, but to me, it would be a better image without the sore thumb (I'm not a journalist.) C&C welcome.

[Goldcoastgolfer]

I think this composition works and you should be able to clone the antenna out pretty easily. I think I'd be inclined to go for black and white with this perspective. The shadows on the reds stop the sculpture from standing out against the sky as much as your earlier photos.

[Snarkbyte]

Thanks, Malcolm. I'll work on a B&W rendition and post later. The antenna will be easy to remove, and there's also a tiny bit of the sculpture just barely visible in the upper left corner that needs to be omitted.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Al,

Viewed big, it is a shame it is covered in the anti-pigeon spikes though, although perhaps they are better than the alternative (yuk)

I agree with cloning out the antenna, but I don't expect you to try to do the spikes

[Snarkbyte]

Thanks for commenting, Dave. The spikes are a bit annoying, but even with context-sensitive healing, it would be a pain to remove them all.

Here's the B&W version. This was fairly complex in itself; in order to get some reasonable tonal balance, the trees, buildings, and sculpture had to be converted in separate layers. I tried using color adjustments for tonal separation, but it didn't work very well.

[Goldcoastgolfer]

I like it. What do you think?

[Snarkbyte]

Thanks, Malcolm.

I think the shot could be improved by reshooting a little earlier in the day. The building on the left is partly in shadow, which isn't really distracting, but it would look better if it were completely sunlit. Also, the beam on the sculpture that parallels the roof line of the left building is likewise partially sunlit and partially in shadow. I rather like how the highlighted portion of that beam enhances the roofline of the building, but I don't know if a sun angle that completely illuminates both the building and the beam on the sculpture is even possible. There is a slight dark smudge in the upper left corner where I removed a small bit of the sculpture, so I should retouch that a bit. (Removing the bit of sculpture is an improvement, but the dark smudge is annoying.)

[Goldcoastgolfer]

It might be worthwhile going back at a different time of day - although you might have to just park yourself and wait for the light to do what you want it to do. I would imagine the shadows and light would move really quickly earlier or later in the day. It's an interesting challenge though!