chris_finegan

An interesing exploration of organic vs. geometric, natural vs. man-made. Reminds me a bit of Alfred Stieglitz's famous 1903 photograph "The Flatiron". Check it out here.

Nice light play and geometric study, especially with respect to the way the steps echo the "pointy" tiles while riding on a smooth curve. That curve is in turn placed against a straight line, which adds a further element of contrast. If anything, I would remove the doormat from the bottom right corner and possibly try pointing the camera slightly more toward the left to catch the bottom of the stair while retaining the vertical beam.

I think that just a hair more lighting on the first and last benches might be interesting to see. The repetition is interesting, and the lines are clean, if a bit simple. This could make a good subject for a little painting with light experiment.

This image had me very confused for a minute. At first I thought I was looking at a horizontal reflection, then figured out that I was looking up. I like the geometric abstraction and angle play, but I almost find the organic shapes of the trees a a bit intrusive against what (to me) seems like a purely geometric exploration.

Nice playful image. I find the text a bit distracting, though. You might want to put it somewhere in the frame, and at a slightly lower contrast.

Wow, very cool symmetry! The difference in lighting between the two sides models the surfaces well and prevents them from becoming flat geometic elements. The off-white and clean blue look comfortable together, for lack of a better description. If I had to change one thing, I would get rid of the (very thin) dark line going down the left side of the photo.

Nice abstract. I would play around with other points of view on the bridge (?) and under various lighting conditions. This might be really cool just after sunset if the bridge is lit from below. You could end up with a nice warm yellow on blue sort of thing.

Nice juxtaposition of elements, and I think the little boy definitely adds to the photo. But the tonal rendition is somewhat flat and blown out, and there is little to suggest a spatial distinction between the arch and the plateau in the background. I think a location is great, but the lighting and exposure could maybe be better.

For those who are curious just how much manipulation was done, here's the original photo from which I made this.

I'm curious to know people's opinions on this photograph. It is clearly altered, and I have made an effort to make those alterations engaging. As you can see the photo has been mirrored over to the right, but I made changes to small details such as dirt on the columns and shadows in the background to throw that basic mirroring for a twist. There is also the obvious person, who is only on one side.

 

My question is, do those details keep your eye moving around the photo? Do you find it engaging? Confusing? Total crap? I would really appreciate any input you might have, no matter how brief. I realize I'm asking a lot of questions, and even a partial answer would be most appreciated. Thanks in advance!