landscape Gubbio

I find this photo very natural. I keep thinking what is behind the stone fence. So the shadow and the fence make the space and time. The women is occupied with something useful. I do not feel that she is missng anything. This is photography.

I like this image but again I do agree that the shadow in the foreground did not add anything good to this work.

I think this needs to be cropped tighter. (See attached.)

Everyone seems to have a problem with the composition with this picture, as do I. We don't all agree on a way to crop the image, and the reason, I feel that is so is that it may have already been cropped too much. There should be a lot more of the image off to the right which appears to have been lost through cropping. The image looks as if it is square, but that is not so. The way it shows up on my screen is as a slightly vertical image. Cropped or not, the subject is right in the middle left to right, but the weight of the whole photograph is placed on the left with not enough picture on the right to balance it.
I am not bothered by the shadow in the foreground, in fact I sort of like the additional weight there. I am concerned for the safety of the subject with bricks or stones falling from the building and its obvious bulging of its side right toward her.

Never the less, I like the nice afternoon (or morning) lighting and the subject matter. Well done, and congratulations on being selected for this weeks pummeling.

 

My friend Andrew Campbell, this is too vertical and do miss the proper alighnment, the image no more balanced this way, the open area to the right do add to whats called the compelete composition of this image, if not for the shadow in the forgrpund, I find this image very appeling and of very orignal colors and contrast.

I like the lighting and the soft color work. The photo has a pleasant and easy feel to it.

Andrew's crop gives the image more presence and an energy I respond to. It's a stronger statement which works here for me, though it might not be what the photographer had in mind.

Someone mentioned depth. I find little depth in the image. As a matter of fact, it feels flat to me. The sky feels almost like a two-dimensional painted backdrop. I have actually been working with intentionally flattening some of my own work to get a kind of primitive or Rousseau-like effect, so I find that aspect somewhat appealing and interesting, though I wouldn't say it convinces me in this case and am not suggesting I think that was the photographer's intention.

I think the shadow is of interest and provides a good element in the foreground.

It feels like something ought to be drawing my attention more (or much less) to the person seated. She's a presence but not a terribly compelling one, to me.

Andrew's crop throws the composition out of balance making it feel too vertical leaving the scene cramped and awkward. This works in direct opposition to the relaxed mood I get from the photographers own decision about the aspect ratio. I also believe that the wall ornamentation , which is lost in Andrew's crop suggestion, is a significant loss to the balance of the photo. The lamp on the vertical of building and the ornament on the stone wall when combined with the figure on the bench reinforce the right angle triangle and become the glue that holds the entire composition together.

I like that the shadow in the foreground runs askew to the architecture thus confounding my sense of level and making the scene a bit more interesting.

A great image to ponder.
I haven't read any of the previous critiques so pardon any overlap.
This original, interesting image draws one into the scene and makes the eye wander over the entire image, because every element is interesting and rich.
The subject matter at first glance seems simple, but becomes a complex mixture of ordinary and grand, old and new, close and distant, nature and human-made, light and dark, soft and hard--accentuated by an enigmatic woman engaged in...? This picture invites reflection about each of the individual components, their origin, their experiences that shaped them, and what will happen to them.
The composition is classic and beautiful. Only critique: the building seems to intrude a little too far into the middle. A few steps to the right and back(while keeping the woman at same point in frame) would shift the building a little more to the left and include the left windows and right wall . Large depth of field is great in this setting. The largeness of the scene invites a big print and matching frame. Lighting, color and textures are perfect.
The image looks like a well-done HDR because the original scene clearly had a very wide dynamic range--if so, nice compression of tonality without murdering any of the subject matter (and would the artist please pass along a few tips?). If this scene was happened upon: fantastic eye, speed and great fortune. If composed with a model: high marks for originality, planning, artistry and harmony of contrasts.

Para mí no es ninguna sorpresa ver una foto tuya como destacada. Era cuestión de tiempo simplemente. Mi más sincera enhorabuena, no ya por la elección de la foto, por toda tu obra.
Un saludo.

Great composition, I like most the pastel colors of the sky. Although the color of right side of the floor is perfectly in tone (or in tune) with the sky, I agree with whom suggests to cut a bit of the right side of the picture. It is a pity, anyway, to eliminate the cross on the wall.

A very well ideated photo. Compliments!

Overall, I find the image to be well balanced and it to be a very pleasing image to look at. The complimentary colors in the sky and carried into the scene add a nice warmth with the oranges being a bit more dominant.

The shadow in the foreground offers a nice break from the right angles in the rest of the scene and contains the image nicely. It also adds a nice weight to the bottom of the image. Although we tend to "look" for things in this forum, and I certainly wondered many "what if"'s with regard to this, I think the placement and the angle are both probably perfect. Even if the image was the same dimensions and there were no shadow, I think the image would suffer. Taking away any space from the bottom of this image does seem to compromise the nice proportions and balance of the image.

I am a bit ambivalent about the person sitting in the scene. I don't find them to really add anything nor do they take anything away particularly. Their posture is sort of a neutral and makes me wonder if the two benches, arranged as they are and vacant might not have been more interesting and evocative.

Although I like this image, it might actually be suffering a bit from barrel distortion. Most of the time this is not much of an issue, but here it does add a bit of an unpleasant feel to the buiilding, breaking the peaceful sense of the image--and not in a good way IMO. This also made me realize that the entire image is slightly rotated counter clockwise as well--maybe .5 to 1 degree or so.

While we are on technical issues, something I might have looked at if this were mine would be whether the color could be a bit more clarified-less muddy--in the lit pavers between us and the building, in the left of the image. I think the muddiness could be clarified with a small adjustment.

My last comment is regarding the sky. While I like the look of the entire image, I wonder what would have been if this had not gotten the "painterly" texture and treatment. The image is so nice and this seems to work at this size, but I wonder if it was needed for the image to be successful--recognizing that this seems to be Salvador's style I understand it as necessary for consistency. Of course, such treatment does take the imagery into more of a photo illustration than a true photograph--not that that means anything other than a clarification of category.

I guess I lied, as I do have another comment on the crop offered here by Andrew. While I don't really think it did anything for the image, I am unclear as to what it was supposed to do. What was the reason for the crop? Was the image out of balance, did we need to focus on something else, are square images not pleasant, etc? Anyway, I guess I just like to understand why something is done or suggested--what it is supposed to solve or resolve and what in the original was making such a change necessary. But that might just be me.

I like Andrew's crop because I think it offers something unexpected and a little more unusual. Like you, I don't find the person a particularly compelling feature here, so his crop offers a kind of strength to the building and a bit more blatancy to the composition that I happen to prefer. In strengthening and making the composition a little more unusual, I find myself needing and wanting less from the person in the shot.

As I stated above, I doubt the photographer would choose that crop because it doesn't seem like it achieves the harmony or soothing effect I sense he was likely after here. As you've noted, John, the sky has been dealt with in such a way that suggests how the photographer was approaching this, so I wouldn't go so far as to suggest he actually employ Andrew's crop, because it's just my own taste that prefers it as opposed to something that I think goes along with Salvador's vision.

Gordon has pointed out something significantly lost by the crop, which is the ornament on the low wall in the background. In this case, that would be a trade-off I'd make because I do find more energy in the vertical crop Andrew has shown. I also find the lamp attached to the building to have more presence with the tighter crop.

I find it interesting that in contrast to Fred's view I dislike Andrew's crop in part because it strikes me as entirely expected, simplifying the scene in a rather predictable manner. and reducing it to even more of a visual cliche.

I would agree that the suggested crop is making the scene more banal and highly predictable. The crop is what we photographers do in order to simplified the message and render viewing a question of seconds of attention. It would be a pity here where we do not only have a scene that corresponds to the sign on the house - "piazza grande", but it gives greater vision to the scene, informing on the local and beyond.
I agree also with those that see the function in terms of composition of the shadow at the bottom of the frame.
In general I would not consider this as a great shot. It is pleasant because of the subdue color saturation but it's main "fault" I think is the little role played by the lady on the bench. She does not add must to the scene although having someone sitting there is a need of the scene. The bended back towards the photographer almost asks not to be shot.

great atmosphere! beautiful image. congratulations

The mountain sky and atmosphere are integral to the story here, bathed in rich light. The fixture hangs central as apropos metaphor for this theme. Square crop as is, foreground anchor shadow included, the composition feels perfectly balanced. The power of this image is in it's suggestion as we can almost feel the warmth of this sky on our face, breathe the presence of a grand distant view. To lose any of this suggested view removes this invitation.

Well I guess the Gods of Photo Net forum will descend on me in full and terrible revenge at my temerity.
Well here goes, I thought the pic was dull , boring and uninteresting? ok there was some credit in the composition .
If it was a painting would you buy it for your wall ?
It would need Salvador Dali to add some interest to something as mundane as this .
I will now cross my feet hold out my arms and await my crucifixion at the hands of the righteosly indignant.
salaam allah akbar.

My 2 cents....I really don't what the big deal is with this pix...There is nothing really stunning about it and it seems that the elves are running out of material!!!

My friend Pascal Burel, good morning to you, can you kindly explain to me what does the elevs run out of metrials means, I am following the comments on this image and my poor English some times do not help much, thank you my friend and wishing you al very happy and peaceful new year.

It certainly is not a bad picture, especially with the fairly strong composition and nice colors. Even so, it needs something more to make it really worth looking at for very long. The lone figure sitting to the right does not quite deliver in that regard.

This is certainly an excellent and promising scene just waiting for the right sequence of weather events or persons to unfold or appear and make it truly special, but I do not think that that has happened in this version. It is hardly a failed photo, rather one that has a lot more potential than was realized in this particular capture.

--Lannie

Excel•lent composició. Endemés de un treball de edició molt ben fet.

The key that makes this photo worthy is the lamp! Without that lamp it is a nice photo but not a big deal. The lamp is the star and forces the eye down to the woman then to the right until it hits that "arrow" which points the eye up to the pastel clouds and then since you eye is now moving left to the building and down again!. I did not read all the comments but I think the composition, lighting, cropping, the shadow, EVERYTHING is excellent.</p>
Andrews cropping gives me a feeling of claustrophobia and enclosed and I feel very uncomfortable looking at it. My eye's quickly look for safety but find nothing. My eyes just sit looking for SOMETHING interesting and are stagnant. I look away in boredom.

i think it is a good image and a feeling of mystery. i like it.

wonderful shot

I liked this picture without having to change something in it,well done,rgds.. :)