Architecture or art or ...

[Abitconfused]

In some ways this is not a photograph at all. I adjusted vertical, horizontal, and stretched it in Photoshop. So the FOV is imaginary. I am at a loss to evaluate the image. Thoughts?

[Shadowman]

Subject matter, elements used to convey the subject, methods used in PP to emphasize. If you can truly determine those three things then you are partially on your way to evaluating the image.

[Manfred M]

I'm not quite sure why you suggest that this is not a photography; what you have done is fairly commonly used to correct perspective / distortion in an image. I use these techniques quite frequently when I am not shooting with a perspective correcting lens.

There is a lot of tension in this image; the black sky suggest a night shot, but the direction of the shadows and the relative brightness of the scene suggests otherwise, so my brain gets a bit confused when I look at this image. When my brain gets this confused, I tend to walk away and look at another image. I guess I'm in the same boat as you and am having trouble evaluating this image. To me, that is not a good sign.

The real question is whether or not you like the result of your work?

[Rebel]

I like the image.

[gregj1763]

Personally Ed I find it quite interesting lots of contrast between the buildings walls and windows/doors. I like the large shadow leading my eye to the sign, it feels/looks like the back entrance to a nightclub as the sign above confirms.
My only slight question mark with the image is the sky I find it a bit heavy.
I had a quick edit and will remove if you you don't like.
Regards, Greg

[MrB]

This is most certainly a photograph, as you are using light to create an image, and there should be no objections to anything that you have done to create it. The simple fact that you have created it, also makes it art. The wonderful contrast is the main feature that defines and accentuates the architecture, and the adjustments have retained proportions that give it realism to the viewer, even if the image is not the exact shape of the real building. If it were mine, the only further edit I would make would be a very slight crop to remove the distraction of the bright white strip down the left hand side.

Cheers.
Philip

[IzzieK]

It is a photograph to me...good study of lines and curves and lighting conditions.

[TonyW]

I think this is technically a good photograph with good contrast, perspective and lighting (except that I would get rid of the light stripe down the left hand side) but I don't find the subject matter engaging.

I know your feeling though - I feel doubtful about many of my own photographs in the same way.

[DougR]

Not sure if I am answering the question, but you have taken the raw material provided by your camera and manipulated it into something that although not real, pleases you, ergo, art.
The same as a painter using paint, brushes and canvas to create a painting.
The same thought has occurred to me when I make adjustments to a photo.

DougR

[bnnrcn]

I like the image and I prefer Greg's edit with a brighter sky

[Abitconfused]

I think you are all right!