Back Versions (1)
Modifications (1)
Views: 186 (73 Unique) 
Vote 22
Award Shortlist   

Middle of the Road

By ade_mcfade      
This appeared as a version of another shot 2 days ago - I've brightened the left hand side up a little bit on Nick Waltons' suggestion, but it's otherwise unchanged.

Posted it in its own right as I preferred this one and quite a few other did too.

Before you tell me that the sky is burned out and it's a shame, have a think - is the burned sky a bad thing, what are you missing with that being burned? Take a look at the shot 2 days ago where the sky was not burned (due to a HDR) and compare the 2.

Then if you still think it's bad, tell me why - just curious to know why because I'm convinced that people say this because of conditioning rather than any genuine reason.

Smile

Tags: Cold Manchester Architecture Black and white Tram tracks Landscape and travel Mosley street Burned sky Brightened left hand side

Voters: JamesH81, BOBtheDAZZLER, digipix76 and 19 more


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

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


USA Landscape Photographer of the Year 2016 open to entries NOW!

Comments


digipix76 9 577 England
4 Jan 2009 2:47PM
Bol###s to the sky!.....Sorry.... for me this is about the angle/pov and the tonal graduation from FG to BG + it reminds me of home Sad.....more please.


Ian

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

CaroleA 10 5 3 England
4 Jan 2009 3:47PM
OK then here goes.....I do find it a "bad thing" because it distracts too much: the glare is too harsh for my taste, and in fact quite uncomfortable. Having said that, the very fact of it standing out so much does draw the eye to it, and in doing so then follows the road markings / tram tracks to the convergence point- though, as I said, when my eye does get there, it would prefer it not to be so bright! I like the image for other reasons though (didn't you post something similar quite a few months ago?) - the sense of being directed, the funnelling, the persepective, the fact it's B+W....need I go on?!

By the way, I'm curious: did you have to lie down in the middle of the road to get this? Such dedication!

There: not a hint of "nice pic, click" Wink
ade_mcfade 12 15.2k 216 England
4 Jan 2009 7:25PM

Quote:I do find it a "bad thing" because it distracts too much


Distracts from what though?

What in the shot should you be looking at instead of the bright bit?


Quote:in fact quite uncomfortable


Fantastic, miussion accomplished, on the day it was bloody bright down there and you were dazzled every time you looked up - so I've conveyed what I wanted and you've confirmed it


Quote:the very fact of it standing out so much does draw the eye to it


It just gets better - probably the best critique ever Smile

Seriously though - your reaction is everything I hoped for when dong the mono conversion. I wanted that dazzled, bunny in the headlights kind of reaction.

Mosley Street is a pretty boring stretch except for the museum, so there really isn't much there to photograph, so using the lines of the road and buildings to lead people into the "abyss" at the end was the point of the shot.
Take-a-View 12 293 5 United Kingdom
4 Jan 2009 8:28PM
Take away the burned out sky and you are left with dare I say a boring shot. The burn takes your eye straight into the shot. Like it a lot.
CaroleA 10 5 3 England
4 Jan 2009 8:45PM
Hmmmmm here goes again then... perhaps Distract isn't quite the right word. But for me - accepted, the viewer who is taking from the image what I want, not what you as the creator of the image wanted to portray - I don't like the brightness. You ask what I should be looking at. Well, I was looking at the whole street, the clarity of the black and whites, the symmetry of the street, and the vanishing point - which I didn't want or need illuminating (the tram lines and perspective did that well enough for me - as indeedctheyvdrew me down the street, not the light)'

As a photographer you can aim for an effect and / or related response and you may or may not get it, but ultimately the viewer likes or dislikes an image irrespective of your intent, surely? In which case you might or might not get appreciation (dare I say click?) for it.

And are you saying my reason for disliking it is not genuine? Or is it just that you don't agree with it? 'Cos it feels genuine to me!!

By the way I'm typing this on an iTouch screen so I can't read it all at once - hope my logic makes sense!

Wink
ade_mcfade 12 15.2k 216 England
4 Jan 2009 8:53PM

Quote:
And are you saying my reason for disliking it is not genuine?



no - I'm saying that your "reaction" to it is exactly what I was after. Your reasons for disliking it will be other people's reasons for liking it, and are my reason for making it like this.

I've got the source files and a HDR and could very easily make a shot where it's not burned out, but I CHOSE to burn it out for creative reasons.

It's great that you're taking time to discuss it, cheers.
CaroleA 10 5 3 England
4 Jan 2009 10:00PM

It's great that you're taking time to discuss it, cheers.


You're welcome! But:


I'm convinced that people say this because of conditioning rather than any genuine reason.


I don't think it is conditioning, see? I think I have a genuine reason for disliking it. That's the bit I was responding to there. And wasn't your reason for posting - the experiment, if you like - less about you explaining why you took it as is, but more about you finding out from people why they didn't like it (if indeed they didn't), wasn't it, as per your narrative? So I told you!!

By the way, I didn't dislike it THAT much! I'd just rather it not be there than be - but as you say, you wanted it to be there and that's what matters.

Hope I've done the quote thingie properly: I was guessing really. Never used quotes before (I've only just got the hang of links). And I was sufficiently into the discussion to come and tool up the big machine (especially after having read the final line in the first paragraph of my iTouch attempt....)
CaroleA 10 5 3 England
4 Jan 2009 10:01PM
(Obviously not)
ade_mcfade 12 15.2k 216 England
4 Jan 2009 10:17PM
the start quote is just
Quote:, the end one has the slash in it Smile
CaroleA 10 5 3 England
4 Jan 2009 10:35PM

Quote:The start quote is just
Quote:, the end one has the slash in it


Thanks.....Smile

RogBrown 9 3.1k 10 England
5 Jan 2009 1:09AM
From my point of view Ade, as a member of the "old School", we were all taught that you should not have burnt out areas - down to bad printing technique in the old days - & to some extent that has conditioned my reaction to shots like this. But even allowing for this, there's so much burnt out area in this shot - almost a third of the total area - that it's like a big white hole in the middle that sucks your eye into it. I'd like to see the same shot without the burnt out sky.
Rog
BTW you didn't answer the lady's question as to whether you were lying down in the middle of the road. I'm somewhat curious myself as to how you get some of these shots without getting run down. Smile
Paul Morgan 15 18.2k 6 England
5 Jan 2009 2:58AM
V1 What’s all this with not liking blown parts in pics Sad

It works for me and I`m fine with it, takes me back to the days when I used fast B&W films and fast developers on bright sunny days and blowing highlights for effect.

Try a few shots like this with your Lensbaby Ade, probably my favourite lighting conditions for using them in.

V2 Its fun doing abstracts Smile
ade_mcfade 12 15.2k 216 England
5 Jan 2009 9:32AM
Rog - look back 2 days, there's a colour version of the shot with not burn out. Once oyu see that you're realise that there was chuff all in the burned areas of this shot - in fact trying to keep it from burning leaves it somewhat flat and boring. But maybe that's how you like it, eh Wink Fits in with the old rules better

I have an Angle Finder which allows me to get the camera really low and not have to lie down Smile
RogBrown 9 3.1k 10 England
5 Jan 2009 10:55AM
Yep. Call me an old fuddy-duddy but I prefer it. What's it like going back to work? Sad
ade_mcfade 12 15.2k 216 England
5 Jan 2009 12:16PM
was back on Friday - and it was horrible :-(
GTM 8 133
7 Jan 2009 1:10PM
This is fantastic, I have to agree I love the way it slaps you in the face.

Kind of picture I'd love to have hanging on my way, so rich and dark...

Brilliant stuff...
Nick_w Plus
9 4.3k 99 England
8 Jan 2009 9:35PM
Hi Ade, sorry its taken a while for a comment, but been away on business for a few days. You know I like this (I hope), and I'm shocked that it hasn't had more attention, there again its a mono Wink There are two things that are over hyped Noise and "blown" highlights. Yes its bright, tho I'm not sure about blown, and there is noise in the sky (doesn't bother me). One thing have a look at the colour version (I haven't got PS on my laptop or I would do it), go to channels. Then select each in turn to check which has the most detail in. If you want more detail then copy the relevent channel into a layer, give it a black mask, then paint in the bits you want.

When I get on the PC at home I will have a go and post a mod.

BTW the Balance on the LHS is better for me and I like the vignette channeling you into the scene.
ade_mcfade 12 15.2k 216 England
8 Jan 2009 11:41PM
cheers Nick - it's a HDR and there is lots of "sky" in the dark image of the set, but it's just bland and grey looking - when I was tone mapping, it just looked grey, so decided it wasn't showing the dynamism of the day. Possibly the brightest winters day in Manchester for years Wink

So burn baby burn

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.