Back Modifications (1)
Views: 101 (43 Unique)  Award Shortlist   


By JEFourie
During lunch hour this poor guy was left about 25 meters up in the air...

I wanted to capture 'loneleness'

Tags: Architecture People

Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Exclusive 25% off Affinity Photo: Professional photo editing with no subscription!
This photo is here for critique. Please only comment constructively and with suggestions on how to improve it.


banehawi Plus
14 1.8k 3893 Canada
12 Dec 2012 3:28PM
A very nice idea Jaco. You still need to upload your shot settings btw.

Its a pity he wasnt closer to the right, having the long steel structure in front. I suppose shouting at him to move back for your shot might not have gone down well!

But I did move him in the mod, he didnt mind at all, and straightened the perspective; I also cropped off the end of the structure to suggest it goes on a lot further.

Hope you like the mod,


Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

wenzu78 6 7 Malta
12 Dec 2012 3:34PM
Nicely done banehawi.

Indeed a good idea Jaco.


pablophotographer 6 951 335
12 Dec 2012 4:26PM
Hi, the elements of the picture look just right. The rule of the thirds works well. The one leg of the structure gives food for thought: how long is that structure? I am not sure if the left leg of the structure can be straightened, my computer is being mended, I can't try it. (but I would urge soimeone, if not you to try it.) Banehawi's mod makes it more enigmatic. The fun version of it, would be if the structure was leaning about 60 degrees and a blurred figure was created. Wheeeeeee!!!!
12 Dec 2012 4:49PM
Once again, thank you for your comments. banehawi: what do you mean with 'You still need to upload your shot settings btw'? What is btw?

As a rule I never ever edit my pictures. I believe the true art is in taking the picture as you see it. With editing software almost everyone can 'take' a good picture lately.

My internet is slow from home, I'll look at the modifications tomorrow from work.

Thanks again
paulbroad 10 123 1250 United Kingdom
12 Dec 2012 5:39PM
This is the basis of a cracking shot. I do like Willie's mod as, whilst yours is good, the composition is rather better on the mod. I'm not sure about the warm sepia though. Either colour or a full contrast mono black and white with, possibly, an added sky.

You say you do no image editing. You should. You are using a compact here, so the camera is doing most of the editing work already, but digital images almost always need some work as did film for that matter. The cameras and systems are not perfect and images result from how some programmer in a far off land thought the image should look, so it's not really yours at all unless you put your stamp on it. Film was actually better in that respect.

You will, almost always, need a bit of a tweak on density, contrast and sharpness. Possibly a bit of dodging and burning, standard wet darkroom practices all. That is particularly true of a DSLR. However, you do exactly as you see fit. That's what it's all about.

frz67 8 10 32 Italy
12 Dec 2012 5:52PM

Quote:As a rule I never ever edit my pictures. I believe the true art is in taking the picture as you see it. With editing software almost everyone can 'take' a good picture lately.

There's no chance that the camera sensor sees what your eyes see. The simple fact that the image is compressed in jpeg format alters the image itself.
even in the days when film was the only choice, the processing had a great impact on the final result.
With the editing software you can't transform a bad picture in a good one, maybe in a less bad.
the process of taking photography starts in our brain and uses all the camera capabilities and the seemingly infinite possibilities of the editing software to achieve what we had in our mind. The very important thing is to honestly declare what you have done in post-processing.

By The Way, Banehawi was asking for infos such aperture, shutter speed, ISO setting of this shot. these are useful informations for giving more accurate suggestions on how to take the next shot....

best regards


edit: while I was typing, Paul was faster than me..... Tongue
banehawi Plus
14 1.8k 3893 Canada
12 Dec 2012 6:32PM
Thanks Francesco.

BTW is by the way. When uploading your shot, on the load page, theres an option about half way down the right that says More Exif Options, - click this.

To further add to whats been said, theres is a common misbelief that there is something wrong with any manipulation of a photo (this one is extreme, and used only to show what I was speaking about). This is based on the mistaken belief that in the days of film, no manipulations were done. This is completely false, and clinging to this fallacy as an example of "true art" is based on a lack of knowledge. Every roll of film you presented to a lab was worked on to bring out the best looking prints. The tools in photoshop are all digital equivalents of the tools and processes in the dark room. Think those terrific National Geographic shots are straight from the camera? Think again, - they are heavily edited, and each photographer has an entire team of digital manipulation specialists working for him. The basic original shot is great of course, - but that not what you see. I watched a documentary of the fantastic photographer James Natchway where he spent days with his digital assistant with Photohsop getting one of his famous shots ready for printing. Days, - not a mistake.

The eye, and the camera do NOT see the same thing as Francesco mentions. The eye has a dynamic range vastly superior to the sensor, and the process of seeing involves the visual cortex of the brain. What you see is an image presented to you by that region of the brain, which shows what it thinks you should see, and it relies very heavily on memory. The camera is dumb, and just takes the light entering it as fact, - noting else.

You would be well advised to shake off this ill conceived idea that shots should somehow be pure and untouched. If you want to take good photographs, you must use the dark room to develop your image, - as we have been doing for a very, very long time. Or stop asking for critiques, as they will always suggest you change something.


alistairfarrugia 5 164 88 Malta
13 Dec 2012 10:16AM
There's a bit of a difference between taking a picture to record something as it happened and as it were, and taking a picture with an artistic intent. In your case, you clearly referred to the idea of loneliness, rather than saying "this picture is a record of a man that got stuck on a structure etc etc". What I'm trying to say is that the intention behind your photography sometimes "dictates" what can or should be done with the image in terms of post-processing. Most documentary style (recording something as it happens) photos are typically only edited very slightly, to retain the "realistic" element alive. However, artistic shots are (again, typically) heavily manipulated with a view to better convey the message originally intended.

Let's take your picture for instance. Had this bloke been on the news for having gotten stuck on the structure, for instance, and you wanted to send the photo to newspapers, you would probably limit the editing done as otherwise it wouldn't be as news-worthy based on the fact that it would look less real, so to speak. On the other hand, if you had to submit this as your entry to a competition with the "Loneliness" theme, I'm sure manipulation in the direction banehawi took it would be needed, as the end result is more pleasing and sends a more interesting final message.

Just my 2 cents anyway. Regardless, it's an interesting picture! Well done!
13 Dec 2012 1:59PM
Thank you all!! Smile

I'm still learning Wink

Your arguments for editing makes perfect sense...
Focus_Man 8 481 631 United Kingdom
13 Dec 2012 3:30PM
Simplifying it, photography is an art (always has been) so from time to time we employ 'artistic licence'.

I say that whilst totally agreeing with Willie as far as the detail is concerned. You should have seen the fiddling about that I did in my darkroom in the old days! Tipping out films mid-developing to give a wash before continuing with development. Over exposure together with under development, Bits of cardboard on wire for dodging and burning, tilting enlarger head and a tilting baseboard, almost every basic tool in PS was used in the darkroom, the main difference of course is now we can see what we are doing and it is much easiler and not so lonely - I could never get my wife to join me in the darkroom!

paulbroad 10 123 1250 United Kingdom
13 Dec 2012 7:00PM
Interesting discussion. Alistair makes the best points and I totally agree with him. Minimal process for record, the skies the limit elsewhere. Basic processing skills should always be mastered and available though.


Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.