OZ 7

Does it seem top heavy?

I don't think it seems top-heavy. Did you try rotating it 180, though?

Yeah, but then it would be upside down. :-)

 

You're forgiven, but I have a thing about rotating found abstracts. Mostly it has to do with the integrity of the lighting and the ability to read it as seen (without standing on your head).

Hi Carl, Intriguing reflections. I know this doesn't make sense but it feels Left heavy. On playing with the picture, Mirroring seems to offer (me) a better sense of balance.

OK, I tried your flip and Lou Ann's flip. Lou Ann, yours looked like something emerging from underwater . . kind of cool actually. Michael, I expected the lower left entry to zoom upward along the newly created leading line. Didn't happen. I did feel as though the upper left (now right) was somehow more of a distinct element, but I didn't feel as though the balance was any better (or, to be fair, any worse.)

Well Carl, I Did say it wouldn't make sense. :-)

 

It may have something to do with individual (neurological) differences in perception and preference, which might also explain why we can't please all the people all of the time. But I do like this picture, in part because those two things make me stop to ponder what they might be. :-)

This does not seem top heavy to me. The lines work well and the relflections invite the eye to explore. If you are concerned about top heaviness, have you considered a square instead of a rectangular frame? With a square, there is a more even distribution of elements.

John, I'm not sure how you want it cropped to square . . . . I can see some off both the top and bottom. I wouldn't want to reduce the impact of the repeating curved lines.

 

Michael, a discussion about perception would be quite interesting. I learned a while back that I have lots of leading lines coming in from the lower right corner instead of the lower left, and that's due to left eye / right eye dominance issues. There are probably some similar differences in perception that are connected to color theory. I'm always looking for articles and discussions that explain why we all see things differently . . . . . or the same.

I wasn't suggesting that you crop this particular image. I assumed this image was a crop of larger file, and that larger file could be cropped into a square frame. Just an idea.

I think this IS top heavy but not from compositional problems Carl.More from extreme tonal values that do not offer the viewer any anchor to keep the eyes from wandering off the top or bottom of the image...opacity issues that effect textures,maybe lack of?I think one of your strong signatures Carl that attracts me to most of your work is your ability to achieve powerful color density,something that I strive for myself.Do not confuse density with saturation.Here there is no apparant density,almost muddled shades of gray that is most obvious in lower part of image.I get a perception(real or imagined?)of vignetting in the blues but a washed out drab look in the highlites which leads back to the anchor issue.Anyway,just my opinion Carl.

I agree with Thomas that it does feel top heavy, not compositionally, but rather because of the heavy color as opposed to the lighter lower half. I wouldn't change anything compositionally, I too enjoy the curves the way they are. In fact they seem to be the main driving force of what takes this from a simple building shot to more of an abstract. If in fact the curves are not against the glass in the darker areas I think I've figured it out. If that is not the case I remain sufficiently confused by this image. Can you give me a hint?

Carl, Chinese is written from top to bottom, right to left, and we read books from the back cover to the front - which may partially explain our perceptual differences. :-)

My hands down, absolute favorite of the series. The scores being given to this are ridiculous.

 

Great shot Carl. I had a long diatribe written about the ratings but removed it. This is not the place to fight that battle...

 

Dave

Dave, I'm delighted with the response to this image . . . . some nice rates, only a few who don't care for this sort of thing, but mostly because some thoughtful folks cared to spend some time looking at it, thinking about it, and offering their ideas. I care much more about that than which page it's on for a day or two.

 

This is a wide angle lens, shot at an angle, so the curved lines are horizontal on the actual building. The 'spires' are reflections off to the right.

 

Part of my concern is that perceptually we're used to seeing the light sky on top and the dark earth below (except of course, in China, Michael, where we were told everything was upside down in the cartoons we saw as kids. :-)) There is also a related issue of dark being heavy and therefore providing a base.

 

The issue might not be quite so critical if there was better definition within the dark tones on the top and the light ones on the bottom. The exposure is OK, and there's nothing blown out, but still there's not as much contrast as I'd like that would help separate each element. (Jpeg compression affects the top a bit, but not much.)

 

This is full frame, as are most uploads. I usually mention if they're not.

I assumed that the curved lines were horizontal (though not straight)... I just can't figure out the dark areas. A reflection of what? You don't need to tell if you don't want to, it is just boggling my mind (at times an easy task, though usually not). Good job.

This whole building boggles the mind. Think of it as two large glass structures, one with undulating curved surfaces, at right angles to each others. (I'll upload a record shot . . someday soon :-))

"I learned a while back that I have lots of leading lines coming in from the lower right corner instead of the lower left, and that's due to left eye / right eye dominance issues."

It's that word "instead" that bothers me a bit, as your critic seems to be implying that for the sake of appealing to human norms, (left eye/right eye) you actually should have your leading lines coming up from lower left. This might affect public "appeal" but intellectual "challenge" often strikes me as more important in the visual arts.

What I like here is that the lines and the tonal weight lift you out, up, and beyond the image frame without any sense of wanting to know what lies beyond. In synaesthetic terms it's a bit like a rollercoaster that brings you back to where you started - with a whoosh in the stomach and so on. Some of your other shots of the building have a smoother flow - monodirectional if you will - but this has both a centrifugal and a centripetal force - to my eye.

You might be interested in Rudolf Arnheim's The Power of the Center or some of Piet Mondrian's writings on Dynamic Equilibrium, but for a real long weekend, try Ernst Gombrich's The Sense of Order which goes into the psychology of patterns in some depth.

"Does it seem top heavy?" Not in the slightest.

I like the color and the lines. Blue is nice. Maybe you will find it grazy, but I would turn the picture 90 degree counterclockwise.

 

Best regards Chris

I should clarify that my frequent placement of leading lines coming out of the lower right is subconscious. I've heard too many photographers say that we always read an image by entering from the lower left which is a notion I don't accept. We go to bright areas, high contrast, warm colors, and find leading lines that could start anywhere.

 

I have this same resistance to the idea of perfect pitch, ie that there are people who are born with the ability to produce A = 440 cps, which is of course an arbitrary Western standard.

 

Thanks for the book references. I just got one out of the library yesterday on symmetry.

That rotation really emphasizes the curved lines playing off the straight ones, doesn't it.

Carl, I figured it would be subconcious, and as a flute player I understand your analogy of pitch - some critics must find it convenient to assume that we (should) all read images to an equal tempered scale, but the basis of music is a 'just' scale. (I bow to your expertise on that one, I only play 12-bar blues.)

I was reading about the role of synaesthesia in creativity a while back - the facility for 'seeing' taste, or 'hearing' colors. It's quite strange, but it seems to operate at a deeper level than left/right brain polarity, and it's likely that it enhances left/right communication. Perhaps, given the variations among people, it may help explain why some are so drawn to line and others to color, or why certain forms of abstraction can appeal to many or to few. One time, in a room of a dozen people, I was the only person who expressed an affinity for Mondrian's harmonies - whereas three of the group couldn't see anything valid in Jackson Pollock. Synaesthesia is not in any sense a magic bullet for being creative, but I think it probably influences our appreciation of form and direction.

The idea that we 'only' read images up from the lower left is a nonsense even if it is the more common point of entry for users of western alphabets. And what Michael Chang wrote about Chinese is also true for Arabic speakers. I've read that nomadic, non-literate Arabs, (of which there are obviously relatively few these days) have no instant recognition of the perfect right angle which is bred into us in the western world. Nurture, and nature; but for every single 'norm' that can be described there are also a dozen others.

Had to come back to this one Carl. I am still having trouble figuring it out, not that I really need to. Is the verticle "structure" part of the building or a reflection of another? I really love this image. Lots of fun to look at...

 

Dave

I've found a few interesting web sites recently that present certain rules about the orientation and location of lines in particular that seem to require a specific interpretation. They're interesting, but I would love to find other sources that challenge those specific notions. I think this falls into the category of "the more I learn, the less I know."

 

I'm blues oriented myself. I'm sure you know how much resitance there was to the equal tempered scale as it was introduced. The science and 'fairness' of it all (with regard to the ability to play in all keys without offense) is something that appeals to me. My daily work is far more science and less art than many people imagine.

Carl, this is a beautiful image, framed to perfection. How you are able to capture so many different planes with various degrees of intensity without overdoing the contrast is beyond me. Personaly I think the colour values are better than all right ...they are perfect. Far too often in this venue some push for more "punch" or "pop" when it is not necessary. I think that is why I prefer this image to the previous one I saw tonight that displayed much harsher lines of gold and blue. Mirrored glass is a fascinating subject and I think you capture it's essence very well.

I like it.