Second-hand Sunset No. 1

I was intrigued by the way the setting sun was catching the windows of

the banking towers and found the juxtaposition of this scene with the

much more humble building in the foreground interesting. I was hoping

to solicit opinions as to whether the foreground element adds to, or

detracts from the overall effect. Thank you kindly for any

comments/suggestions.

A beautiful cityscape, Gordon. I do find the foreground building somewhat distracting, there is so many interesting items going on with it that it becomes a place to be examined closer. My opinion, FWIW. (:

 

I do like the chair though, a front row seat to what looks to be the start of a fantastic light show.

 

regards,

Thanks for taking the time to share your opinion. I have several shots with just the cityscape and have trouble deciding which way looks best.

I really like it. It's a much more original way to show the colors of the setting sun than showing the actual sun setting, which although beautiful, has been photographed so many times as to lose a lot of its appeal. This is interesting and beautiful.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I too thought it was something a little different in the sunset department.

Rich color and, obviously, wonderful light. I like the foreground as both a point of reference and a counterpoint to the modern skyline. A fine study!

Gord, the foreground building is perfect for this. Without that building then the image would be just a colourful cityscape. The humble looking building in the foreground adds some great contrast, and almost looks like it's completely out of place, which works a treat. I like the way the clouds of steam wafting from the buildings has been capture as well - it adds an element of movement or life to what are otherwise solid stationary forms.

 

Nice interesting picture with plenty to draw the viewer in. Well spotted.

 

Pete

Thanks for the input, you know I value your opinions greatly.

Thanks for helping me with this one. Usually I am much more decisive but I have shots of this with the entire foreground building all the way back to only a small portion of the background buildings and it is making my head spin trying to figure out which ones work. Some of that steam is quite extreme as it was minus 15 C. that evening. In some of the close ups I shot of the TD bank building ( pointy one towards the right )the top looks like something getting ready to lift off from Cape Canaveral.

One of the great things about PN is all the different opinions, we all see and admire something through different eyes.....now for my take on this. I very much like the lighting on the distant buildings and although the foreground building is hard to decipher as to content it does add to the composition in that without it, to me, the photo becomes "just another cityscape", although a nicely composed one. The added interest of the foreground building makes it more of a "story" for me to puzzle over.

Thanks , the story concept was what I found interesting originally. The foreground posed a question. I was curious if this was just me, so I really appreciate your take on this one.

Gord, my feelings are the same as with the previous two, that the old is supporing the new... but for me the difference is in the chair... really a bit funny to find it there. In its form it looks as belongs to the old building, but visually its placement is among the the cityscape....I find it symbolic, that at the end ,all of the people ,in both ,are human being, with the pains, emotions, love , hate, sickness and joys etc.

It is a totally different type of skyline that you would see. It is like a picture set apart by an appartment of somesort and that CHAIR uptop just does it for me. I feel like someone should be sitting up there. I think this picture is fantastic!

Gordon, I thought the building in front was a train. Even reading your intro, I couldn't see it until I saw the window unit. I still enjoyed the composition.

 

After knowing what it is, I like the image. However, considering you stated it as a concern, you may want to address it. Usually if you question it, it is true. That being said though, I like the idea of a humble building in the foreground. Perhaps if you showed just a tad bit more of the building and made it more identifiable, it would be less distracting to you not having to figure out what it is.

 

The chair on the roof is pretty cool.

 

I'd say philosophically, this could represent the poor humble beings supporting, holding up and bearing the weight of the City's golden boys and their business. But then, it can be seen as a beautiful perspective of a sunset.

 

Great shot,

Kirk

Thanks, That is a big help to know your initial reaction. I do have several versions and in some I have much more of the building, so that it is unmistakable not a train LOL I can so totally see this narrow strip of building with its flat roof line looking like a train. I agree there is a story to be told in the economic divide between the two views. A discussion on that very subject ensued on my other shot of that roof posted I believe yesterday. I look at that chair and can envision someone sitting out there on a regular basis watching the reflected sunlight as the sun goes down. And yes I do agree, if you have to ask, you most likely already have your answer :)

Thanks for dropping by. Another fan of that chair... you gotta admit, whoever sits there gets a nice view of some pretty fancy bank towers and some second-hand sunsets to boot!

I agree that in the end each in there own worlds have there triumphs and tribulations, there loves and their families. These things we all share.

I like the three distinct statements. An indigo sky, darkening into nightfall. A string of skyscrapers, alert, lit up, standing like sentries. And a soft, almost wilted foreground with glimpses into people's lives like a peek-a-boo diorama. And my favorite part is that little lawnchair, seated atop the roof, back turned, looking out at the wonder of the city and beyond. A beautiful shot, Gordon with great colors and presence.

Love the composition and ditto on all the great comments above. IMO, the older building at the bottom might make a more positive contribution if it were less blue. Then again, I might have missed the whole point :) Food for thought and discussion attached. Great original and thank you for sharing! Cheers -

Thanks for your comment. Interesting that you see this as a triad of elements since this is how I worked on it. From my limited, yet slowly growing, PS skill the hardest part was trying to get the sky and office towers feeling harmonious.

Thanks so much for taking the time to work on this and lend your keen eyes. Somewhere along the line in my PP that building did end up much too blue and I completely overlooked this in the final image. Your version is a big improvement. Tonight I will go back to the original file to see just how blue the raw file was and take another run at that foreground. I will repost and perhaps you could let me know what you think. I'm pretty sure you never miss the point and in this case I am certain it was I who failed to see the forest for the trees. Again Alberta thanks a bunch.

Gord, it is a personal taste of course, but I think that colorwise your original with the blue FG is a better choice IMO.( It is not anything personal Alberta, just my point of view, I hope you will understand that.)

Of course I understand, pnina. My uploads always say "food for thought" because I know at the outset that this is art and there is never a right or wrong, only what pleases.

 

The original photo, Gordon, has a certain New Yorker magazine feel to it (are you familiar with that publication?) that my rework lacks. So, my friend, it's quite up to you. Decisions, decisions :)

Thanks both of you. Food for thought is what I come here for and I am grateful. I really need to go back and take a look at how faithful my final shot is to the original scene. I'm not sure why that matters but somehow it does. My first reaction was OMG how did I miss how blue that building ended up but on reflection Alberta's version is a bit too grey. The great thing is that I am now inspired to think about that foreground much more than I previously had and in a new light. Perhaps taking another look will reveal a middle ground that works better or maybe not. There is only one way to find out. Usually I am fairly decisive but this particular image has me vacillating on several different fronts.

 

Alberta , yes I have read the New Yorker now and again, although not recently.

I LOVE the top two-thirds of the photo. The bottom portion distracts me. You know how I respond to photos -- this is emotion, not cognition. The logical analysis comes long after the emotional response.

 

I think this, being evocative of the previous one, carries those associations with it for me.

 

And I'm not sure my idiosyncratic response is helpful in any way. I'm half-decided to delete this post.

 

And half-decided not to.