Empire State Building

Enter Brooklyn Bridge Park (Brooklyn's DUMBO neighborhood) at Jay street. Walk to between the first and second set of benches and you'll see a small hill or knoll on your left. Climb to the top of that knoll and you'll see the Western side of 10 Jay Street. I don't know if it's mirrored or just highly reflective glass but that's where this image of The Empire State Building was captured. The first image (except for resizing to post) is how it came out of the camera, and yes it is digital (Panasonic Lumix DC-ZS70). The second image is after initial editing. At that point I said to myself. Self I said. This image might be better as a grayscale. Comments\critiques welcome.

 

As it came out of the camera.

Grayscale.

 

Ooops! This post didn't quite work out the way I intended. "As it came out of the camera" is ok, but the post editing grayscale and color versions somehow switched places

 

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by MrAndMrsIzzy

It isn't clear from the description of your shooting location, but was it glass you shot through that explains the twisted, distorted image?

Reflected, if I understand the original post.

Reflected, if I understand the original post.

 

Yes, you're right, got it now - Thanks

Reflected is right. I'm guessing the distortions are at least partially due to irregularities in the surface of the glass. Not just in this image but others as well, and not just in the glass of 10 Jay. Also, 10 Jay and Brooklyn Bridge Park are on The Brooklyn side of The East River. The Empire State Building is halfway across Manhattan on the other side of The East River and to get the image to a viewable size I had to really zoom the lens. That may also contribute to the distortion. Personally I think it adds interest, but that's me......Izzy Edited August 7, 2020 by MrAndMrsIzzy

Reflections are great fun - I do them when I can find a good one. Empire State from an era of civic pride, evocative.

I like this shot. There are many many photos of this landmark building. Why shoot it the same way again?

 

The rippling, twisted reflection of the building, a roundabout, non-view. I think the 3rd iteration is best.

I I think the 3rd iteration is best.

 

Eric, Sandy, Ric thanks for the compliments.

Ric Question. "3rd iteration" Do you mean the color version which appears in the third spot of the post, or the grayscale version which was supposed to be in the third spot of the post?

Izzy, I almost put my foot in it, until realizing that the distortion is due to reflections. Reflections can be tricky. I ditto Ricochet.

I like the color version that appears last. I iike the way the color palette shifts from dark to light upwardly and the way the building colors match exactly the hues of the sky.

and the way the vertical lines of the ESB juxtapose against the horizontal lines of the balconies in the brick building. It's a little out of balance with nothing but sky on the right side but overall this is pretty cool,

Thanks all for the compliments.

Ric I see your point about the balance and I'll keep that in mind going forward.

Thanks all for the compliments.

Ric I see your point about the balance and I'll keep that in mind going forward.

 

The biggest take-away from this, by my way of thinking, is that you succeeded in giving us a different sort of view of an iconic building that's been photographed many thousands of times. So, bravo- indeed.

I just looked at these again while listening to Jimi Hendrix's Star Spangled Banner, really worked well.

Thanks again Ricochet and Eric.

 

Jimi Hendrix! There's a name I haven't heard in a while.

I too like the stark, colorized version (#3 here) the best.

 

Did you crop the shot to get only the reflection or were you that tight? I ask because with a photograph of a reflection I think its good to get some of the surrounding, bordering, straight ahead stuff too so the viewer knows its a reflection. You told us it was a reflection but what about when you just display the photograph? How does a viewer without the verbal hint recognize this as a reflection as opposed to simply a photoshop distortion? The background would place the reflection in the local context of where it was taken and this juxtaposition could add another layer of interest.

How does a viewer without the verbal hint recognize this as a reflection as opposed to simply a photoshop distortion?

This is a very interesting question, especially in this day and age. However, if I didn't want to ground the viewer in reality, I wouldn't necessarily want to answer that question via the image. Maybe, eliciting the question by not giving the viewer a clue is a valid ambiguity to portray. Nothing wrong with leaving them wonder. I do agree that providing context can sometimes be of great benefit to such distortions—not so much to alleviate concerns about Photoshop as much as to provide visual counterpoint to the distortion—but I also think there are times, and this may be one of them, when simply showing the distortion is enough in itself.

 

In any case, as to the two processed versions, one black and white, one color, if the concern is confronting a viewer with possible Photoshop play, the processing on both worked versions offers an unambiguous answer. While the distortion in the original doesn't look photoshopped to me, and I had no doubt it was a reflection, the processing of the other two look Photoshopped enough to leave no doubt.

 

_________

 

Perhaps to most New Yorkers, and I am originally one, such reflected distorted views in more modern glass buildings are rather commonplace, so how special and unique this is may depend on how many New York photos of similar scenes one's seen and how much time one has spent walking around any big city.

 

I don't think the bottom portion of the photo adds much here, as that's a pretty heavy brown building in the foreground and its contrast to the Empire State's Art Deco wondrousness doesn't really play well for me. I do appreciate the flag and think it would all read better in the context of a less strangely hued, saturated, sharpened, and added-cloud-fluffiness context.

With regards to cropping (or lack of it). No it was not cropped. As indicated in the first (how it came out of the camera) view.

As for the processing the grayscale did get a little more than the color one. I'm calling it grayscale but it's actually a B\W conversion from color with either the infra-red or deep red filtration applied. I may also have tweaked brightness and contrast a little. What I was going for was that kind of gritty look you see in depression era or dustbowl pics. I may also have played around with the sharpness to get a little sort of graininess effect, but I'm not sure.

Edited August 10, 2020 by MrAndMrsIzzy