single photos Defying time

Wow, wow, WOW!!

WOW ............. Just beautiful!

Best regards, Pamela

Please note the following:

• This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest.
• Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Help & Questions Forum.
• The About Photograph of the Week page tells you more about this feature of photo.net.
• Before writing a contribution to this thread, please consider our reason for having this forum: to help people learn about photography. Visitors have browsed the gallery, found a few striking images and want to know things like why is it a good picture, why does it work? Or, indeed, why doesn't it work, or how could it be improved? Try to answer such questions with your contribution.

So John........... What do we think about this one?

Personally I like this cartoon squirrel better.
Fox squirrel: Photo by Photographer Marianna Safronova - photo.net

 Love the picture, I think the light in the arches is incredibly beautiful.  Love the color, sharpness. Good job.

Respectfully, I don't like the editing of the sky, the clouds are clones of each other. Ask yourself what is the subject? The coliseum or the sky? In my opinion the sky takes away from the subject.

Thanks. 

The lighting is stunning. The wispy clouds add a nice fill to the sky area

What a marvellous shot!

A brilliant and intriguing photo, but it also seems overly manipulated in photoshop.

I really like the work on this picture! It is evident that it is a lotof work on it, but the work is a very good one and most probably it was start from a "normal" picture and was end up to an art picture.
Simona

It is a beautiful photograph, indeed there is a lot of post processing here but again at the end of the day, one need a pleasant image to view and this image is pleasant.

Beautifull! What a great way to show us how different can a common view can be shown when you hae such a creative sense and talent! Congratulations!

Beautiful shot..... the sky is simply unbelievable.... well done..

Beautiful.
The perspective seems to have been digitally "corrected" with the aim of keeping the sides perfectly vertical. However in reality it makes the building look top heavy - an optical illusion which makes the top seem as if it is flaring outwards. I usually under correct the vertical so that it "appears" vertical.

What an absolute gift from the heavens to see such a sky while you were ready with you camera in perfect position and talents to capture an amazing image. Bravo for your skills. A stunning image indeed!

It's like riding in an elevator that's blaring musak, lit only by neon day-glo lighting which illuminates wall-to-wall Elvises on black velvet, all the time high on bad LSD.

Others' beauty. To me, hideous kitsch. PNs top-rated photos.

Eye of the beholder.

I would bet that the clouds were generated / enhanced by a program such as "Fractalis", Alien Skin's cloud program followed by Topaz Simplify, or some similar plugin(s).

It's a neat piece of work. If it were the cover of a book about the anti-Christ arriving in Italy in 2012, it would be very appropriate and well-done. I usually like interesting efx, but I'm afraid this is a bit over the top for me as a piece of general interest digital art.

Just my $0.02,

Tom M

When all the superlatives have been pronounced about the stunning colors and the eye catching scene, the photo hurts at least my eyes.
It is a shot made during the hour, where Colosseum, on the one hand, is lid by electric lights inside the ruin, on the arches, and from the outside on the walls - and on the other from frequent strong lights from a setting sun. It is shot from the North-Western side of Colosseum, so the sun is setting behind the camera. The lights are therefore to a certain degree "real" but in my eyes the colors are from an esthetic point of view, serious over-saturated (real or not). Especially the yellow would deserve to be calmed down. It might even be better in black and white, in order to be sure not to fall in the trap of the sunset syndrome, that we so often meet here on PN.

Thank you all for comments!
Tom,
Neither of the Fractalis, Alien Skin's cloud program, Topaz Simplify (don't even have last two), or any other similar programs or plug-ins were used. Just clarifying.
Best regards,
Marianna

Very effective apocalyptic composition, image, in the way, prophetic as well. Bravo!

It is indeed "interesting and worthy of discussion": interesting to see the multitude of manipulations here, and worthy of discussion is why PN and others reward this supersaturated-color kitsch... Does not look authentic, sorry

Although I think the image is a bit overcooked and it certainly isn't the sort of image I look for to represent me as a photographer, I am sure most, seeing these elements, would not hesitate to shoot it in some form, a form more indicative of one's own style maybe. Showing it might be another thing, although there might be some commercial value in such an image as stock.

The problem with the image as a photograph, IMO, is the overcooking. Too much color saturation--especially in one band/frequency-- muddies up an image and can suck the life out of it. Here, Anders suggests it is yellow, my own sense is that it is bit overdone in the magenta/orange area(at least to my taste and test). The reduction of the blanket of these colors would greatly clarify the image and make it pop much more while keeping the mood intended (it does also seem just a bit dark and both of these issues could be taken care of together with some curves adjustments in the blue and green channels).

My other sense is, and due largely to the type of sky we have here, that the image is a bit claustrophobic. We can never tell as armchair photographers if there would be intrusions if the person went wider or not, however, this image does seem to beg for a bit more space and breathing room.

These sorts of overcooked images do generate some curb appeal, but lack a sense of sophistication to them. This image would probably suffer significantly if it was in any form other than on a monitor or backlit. I think it would be very muddy as a print or in a magazine if not worked similarly to what I suggest above, but then there is just a matter of taste as the bottom line.

It is quite awkward to comment after so much appraisal, especially since the ability to produce such an image definitely escapes me. Nonetheless, I'll give it a try. First of all, I'm ok the Elves think the picture is worth discussion, and I do agree. However, any discussion would have a sounder basis if the chosen image had some technical details specified. There is no equipment info here, neither it is specified if the image is manipulated or not (we all have a feeling it is...). It would be very interesting if Marianna could provide us the technical specs- not to rob her of some trick of the trade, just to know better what we are talking about. What I noticed is that the flare of the orange cloud somehow seems to expand on the inner part of the upper arch on the left, and that the light coming from the right of the image is quite unnatural. It has warm orange tones on the second ring of arches on the right and a bluey colder tone on the third on the left (where the "crack" is). No matter which these tricks are (a hint of HDR, maybe a double exposure to superpose that wondrous sky, some burning - no pun intended) talking about the result I reckon that the image is beautifully unreal. It is exactly the kind of picture that makes my street snapshots look dull and unconspicuous. It may be thus very partisan of me, but although I perfectly understand the skill and craft of the author I find these pictures to have an artificial glitter that I do not appreciate much. Hey Elves, what about some simpler shot?

I decided not to embed color profile when I post to photo.net since a few month ago due to resulting drastic color shift between various browsers (some do not accept embedded profiles). I have cheeked on different monitors that image did not appear oversaturated to me (at least to my view which is, of course, subjective) but it certainty might look more saturated than intended with some monitor settings.

Camera & lens info: Nikon D-200, Sigma 10-20 mm, at 10 mm (so could not get any wider shot as this was the only point from where such perspective could be taken), PS CS-2, no other programs or specialized plug-ins.

Best regards,
Marianna

Marianna, even though you had to be in this spot, the image is almost square, which indicates a cropping of the image, so I am guessing there could be some more room at the sides or at the top possibly, and that is what I was referring to.

Saturation is indeed a subjective consideration, however, I do believe that many people here have high end calibrated monitors, so I wouldn't totally discount the comments in relation to monitor nuances.