Early morning

This is quite fascinating. I love the way the bridge disappears into the mist. I prefer the subtlety of the toning and contrast as presented.

 

--Lannie

A nice shot - excellent composition and "capture the moment" quality.

But it literally falls flat.

The tonal range is poor, which is a shame.

It's not that it necessarily needs more contrast, but it definitely needs more range. It looks like a digital shot that was dialed to "B&W".

Maybe a better quality scanner would improve.

The tonal range is a little flat, but trying to convey early morning with the remaining mist and fog I prefer it flat. I do agree with Carl that a slight rotation helps. I like the composition and the use of "triangles" in the composition. The lone figure is put to good use giving an added sense of scale to the bridge. All in all a beautiful piece. Congrats on POW

Excellent composition which needs a little more movement to the left. I feel overly pulled to

the upper right side. The jogger presents the compositional solution but the photograoher

missed the opportunity of him turning the corner and pulling us to the left wth him. The sub-

composition of the cascading triangles in the bridge and foreground work beautifully,

however the value range of the middleground seems a little weak in the top right quarter of

the picture. All in

all I think the image just misses living up to its potential.

I think it's really hard to critique this image without having more data on hand about exposure, ISO, and whatever shooting mode the camera was set for. It's digital, of course, but we don't know whether the photographer did the image capture in the camera's B&W shooting mode, or if not, how the conversion to B&W was done. And the 18-55mm isn't one of Canon's best lenses...I think it's usually sold with the camera when it's bought as a kit.

 

There are lots of different ways to convert to B&W which will give many different results and lots of tonal variations...I just have to wonder which way was used for this photo.

 

It's a "good" photograph, but I agree with someone who said it does need more tonal range. I do like the visible detail on the underside of the bridge, and the human does give the image scale. I sort of like the overall look of the image, but I'd really like to see just a teensy-weensy bit more detail.

It appears that the general concensus here is that the runner contributes to the photo. Just to be different, I am going to disagree. I think this is a superb architectural photo, and the atmospheric conditions create a wonderful, muted mood. I think having a human in there detracts. I'm not sure who else said this, but I too would have liked to have seen a higher resolution version of this.

Great shot, my favorite PoW in a while.

 

I think the runner is essential. Very well composed, I keep trying to get captures like this.

Two thoughts came to my mind immediately upon viewing this photograph. First, what an excellent architectural scene. Really nice! Secondly, it's tilted ever so slightly. I see someone else noticed that and made a fix. Wish I had taken this picture. The B/W tones bring out the foggy effect well. I like having the runner in it too. One gets a better perspective with him in there although it would still be a nice scene without him.

Overall, there is a nice use of line and form here and the photo is nicely composed for the

most part. For me, the tonal range is perfect for this scene. I wonder if sometimes we

just get caught up in the full tonal range thing and forget that it doesn't always exist in

nature-nor should it in all our photos. Here, there is nothing muddy about the tones,

there just isn't a white. We just see the effects of the atmosphere, while the near objects

are anchored in a nice rich black.

 

The image may be slightly cocked to the right, which really doesn't bother me. I do feel

that Carl's version has gone too far and leaves me feeling that I am falling over in that

version.

 

I like the runner, but one thing about him does bother me a bit, the tangency with the

bridge support in the water on the left(our left) shoulder. Almost like the triangular end is

resting perfectly on him. I don't know that this is enough to kill the photo for me, but it is

there and I notice it.

 

Finally, there does seem to possibly be a little too much dead space on the right, which I

feel adversely effects the dynamics of the photo. I certainly am not advocating much

movement here, but a little to bring a bit more life back into the composition, I would see

no loss to the intent of the photo by doing this and I don't see any alternative way of

dealing with this--I hope Lannie doesn't read this because I

think I am advocating, dare I use that word, no I wont, a trim here!

Knockout capture, let down a little by over-done sharpening (I'd like to see a bigger, more

faithful version) and the non-vertical legs (on the bridge, not the runner..) which a small

clockwise rotation would fix.

 

Shame to have to nit pick what is my favourite POW for a long time, too.

 

Flat? I don't think so, nor do I get the 'digital B&W' comments. I can see this being a very,

very nice fine art print with exactly the same tonal treatment.

This is in the great vein of the magnificent B&W cityscapes in the mist.

All that wonderful lines create a perfect dynamism. The running guy, the human scale of the image.

Totally agree for this POW. Compliment !

Melody in B & W. The harmony in composition,tone and light are commendable.

Being constructive does not necessary mean to propose to change the photo.

 

However I think the present discussion is pointing at some very basic observations on composition.

 

For example. is the composition less than perfect because we all observe a certain weight and movement to the right. Of course I can se that it would be more stable if the right pillar had been less prominent in the composition, but I think that the most central lines of that movement to the right are in fact the wires of the bridge and the bowed line on the ground.

 

Furthermore, although the pillar to the right is so very heavily present, it plays in my view a very central role in the composition because of the triangular lines leading the eye to he centre of the photo and towards the running figure. For my eye, that person should be �attached� to the central pillar, exactly where he is. Had it not been the case we would all move even further to the right and the picture would start falling.

 

A central element in these discussions, is maybe whether we all search for a composition that is totally stable and in balance or if, as in this case, a composition that makes us feel moving in one direction or another is a problem. For my eye, the movement that definitely is present in this photo lightens the general composition. Without it the general impression of the photo would be very heavy and less interesting.

 

Anders

Well, most of my points about this phot have already been made, but here goes anyway .... First, this guy (?) has a great portfolio! If you haven't checked it out, stop reading right now and go look. Wow. However, the Elves have selected a photo that is interesting but not his best. There is a color version of this photo and I much prefer it. I agree that the B&W looks a bit flat. Looking at his other works, he is obviously quite skilled at B&W so I imagine he did the best he could with this, but I think it is just not suited to B&W. It seems like it would be with the lonely feeling and the haze, but somehow, for me at least, it just doesn't translate and I like the warm feeling of the color version. Second, I agree that there is a slight tilt and it makes me dizzy just looking at it. But, Carl's version doesn't feel quite right either. Maybe there is something in the eay the lines intersect that just gives that impression? Finally, I just don't care for the big mass on the left. I see Ander's point about it giving a sense of movement, but, for me, it drags the photo down. It's a huge solid mass that draws the eye and dominates the picture, but isn't interesting enough to do so. I think the picture would be much lighter and airier without it. That said, I'm not sure he could have improved the composition. Moving to the left would have brought more of another pillar into the picture and he probably only had time for two shots before the runner was gone. So, he actually did a really great job to get such a quality picture in a difficult situation. So, interesting to look at and very well done, but not quite perfect.

I just reread my comment from last night and realized that I made an error. I love the

right side of the image, and the rest of it for that matter. My discussion on dead space

was meant to be about the left side of the photo.

 

My feeling was that there is a bit too much dead space on the LEFT side of the photo and it

might be reduced a small amount--probably an 1/8 or so of the space between the edge

and the bridge, but no more than 1/4 of it. This would move the bridge a bit further away

from center and reduce the emptiness of the mid and upper left. But today, I am not sure I

still feel that way and might be happy with it as is. If I had to make a decision, I would

probably print both out and sit on them awhile.

 

Everything on the right side of the image pushes the eye to the left and the large object in

the lower left corner holds the overall balance quite well. This is a very nicely done

photograph.

This bridge is the most photographed monument in Portugal. So here goes originality.

However this composition looks different from the hundreds I've seen.

I think b&w was very well choosen. And the picture has some impact. Even for me.

I do like it a lot.

I love this shot very much! I just wish I could see it larger because the file is so small. Then, I only have a small screen monitor so... I think I'll go this morning to by a magnifying glass. :) Talented photographer and NICE NICE WORK!!! 7/7

I think I'll go this morning to BUY a magnifying glass. (Sorry about my English writing...)

Mona, if the jogger was not there, I believe you would be right about the picture being in balance. However, the vertical, slightly off center position of the jogger requires more weight on the left side than the shape(on the lower left)provides. Him going to the left, I feel, would have done the trick.

It's no doubt a great picture. The one flaw I see (if it is a flaw) is the low contrast between the sky and the bridge. Well done!

Nice photo. But it's so obviously tilted to the right that it's impossible for me to ignore that. I agree with someone above that the color photo seems better and not so tonal flat as this one.

Nevertheless, congratulation to POW. Monteiro is one of the most remarkable photographers on this site I've noticed since I was here and this shot is neither one of his best nor represents his work or talent. Look at least at this folder

I agree with you Robert that the fishing portfolio is remarkable. This is a really fine photographer. However, I also notice in the fishing portfolio a few pcitures in B&W that are present in color in other folders. To my untrained eye, these pictures, as with the POW, are inferior to the color versions. I love B&W photographs and books as much as anyone, but this makes me wonder: Why do we convert things to B&W and when does it improve the picture? It seems to me that a B&W picture, especially here on PN, is automatically perceived as more artful or more serious. B&W pictures always rate higher than their color counterparts (see this one for an example). However, too often B&W is used (and I am certainly guilty of this) to cover up faults in color processing, exposure, etc. Is this picture better in B&W or color? What is the point of converting it to B&W and does it gain anything from the process?

To me this is a really great simplification, some lines, some geometry, and then the human element that, in a philisophical sense created the structure. The b/w adds to the simplicity. These simplifications I see as very difficult to achieve especially in crowded cities. So Mr Bernstein can see I was paying attention:)

Kind regards

Peter.

I agree with those that celebrate the quality of the portfolio of F. Monteiro, but I cannot agree on the suggestion that the colour version of this weeks POW is better than the BW version. For me the colour version has a relatively little aesthetical tone of colours in the area of early morning fog under the bridge, which catches the eye immediately and which is not present in the BW version. In the BW version, the composition with its strong lines and forms takes over. I would neither agree with those that would strengthen the contrast in the BW version. Such a move would in my opinion break the general mood of the picture and render it sterile and less attractive.

 

Anders

I have looked at this photo on two different calibrated monitors and still am having

difficulty

with the suggestion that it needs to have its contrast boosted. It just isn't muddy and the

atmosphere is what makes this in my opinion.

 

Bill raised the issue of why convert to b/w if it doesn't improve the photo. I would agree,

but

I think that is subjective. Here, I, and others, like the b/w version much more than the

color, while Bill, and others,

prefer the color. So, I suppose the answer is really up to the person posting the image. I

was also surprised at the statement that b/w covers up sins in color, I always have viewed

it much more difficult to create a b/w photo that is successful than a color. In b/w you

can't hide the lack of seeing and such in the color. But, the question that has long

plagued me on this site is rather why post more than one version at all? Why not choose

what

you feel is best and be done with it! I understand the feedback thing, but at some point

don't you have to make an artistic stand and leave the ratings and opinions of others

behind?