landscape: minor league stadium

[Mosca]

This is for a class I'm taking; the assignment is, a landscape. My intent is to have the parking lot balance the stadium, and for the whole to appear as a pond in the middle of the woods, which is what it looks like to me.

I dunno. I like it, and I don't. Maybe I should amp up the colors or something. There aren't any other vantage points for the shot. I'm sure it will be acceptable for the class. I'd like to see it at night I think, but last night's game was rained out.

[Robert_Lay]

I won't quibble about your choice of subjects - you've explained that, and there is no point in belaboring it.

Your composition is quite good and the exposure and color balance are also quite good.

As you imply, it is lacking a little pizazz, and perhaps the saturation could be increased and perhaps it could be sharpened, but I don't think any of that will be a good substitute for some direct sunlight from a partly cloudy blue sky.

Perhaps there is one thing that might have heightened the interest a little, and that would be a smaller sun angle from either an early morning or a late afternoon shot.

Your sky here suggests a completely overcast sky which is going to have soft light and a relatively low contrast image.

[Mosca]

Thanks, Robert. I think the real issue is that it just isn't as interesting as I thought it was going to be when I conceived it.

[snyderman]

Thanks, Robert. I think the real issue is that it just isn't as interesting as I thought it was going to be when I conceived it.

LOL! that happens to me all the time! But I'll ALWAYS look at baseball of any kind.

Liked your shot and share the same sentiments as the other responder--just needs a bit of color pop and contrast. Mayyyybe just a bit tighter on the crop might work. worth playing around with that a bit.

dave

[Walczak Photo]

I just want to toss my $.02 in here for what it's worth...

While you explained what it was that you were trying to achieve or what you felt you saw in your mind's eye as it were, I have to say that none of that would have been remotely clear if you had not of explained it. Personally I'm a "a cigar is just a cigar" kind of guy and I try to avoid conceptual art precisely for this reason. Some people can look at clouds for example and see everything from Volkswagens to Dragons...I see clouds. Ok...ok...I can see the "dipper" in the Big Dipper but beats me how the devil folks get a bear out of that! LOL!!! Anyways, when you are trying to convey something that "you see in your mind" in any given scene, you need to make sure that it's fairly clear to most people as well otherwise it's not going to make much sense to anyone but you.

In the case of your image here you said the assignment was "a landscape" and while I could be wrong, I don't think most people will see a baseball stadium as such. For better or worse, I believe that when most people think "landscape", they tend to think grand, sweeping vistas, sunrises/sunsets, occasionally farms, etc.. Images such as Ansel Adams created of Yellowstone (and other National Parks) or shots of the Grand Canyon instantly come to mind. A baseball stadium is something that I think most folks would associate with "city scape" instead...which for all intensive purposes here is a completely different subject.

Also, at the risk of being perfectly blunt...your sky is very blah. Basically a white featureless blob there. Next time try a polarizer when it's only partly cloudy or perhaps catch the leading edge of a thunder storm as it's rolling in for a good sense of drama :D.

I think you did have good color here, your exposure looks decent enough and you made good use of the rule of thirds. I think if this shot had of been taken around sunrise/sunset with a better sky and withOUT the baseball stadium, it would have worked much better for your assignment. A long exposure lightening shot...again without the stadium...would have been superb. I'm honestly not trying to be rude here but if I were your instructor I would have to give you a B+ for imagination based on your explanation but a D- for execution. My advice to you is to simply try and see a scene for what it is and what's actually in it...don't try and see things that aren't really there and then expect others to see it too. Sometimes a cigar really is "just a cigar".

Again just my $.02 worth and please excuse my cheesy Freudian quotes there.
Jim

[Mosca]

I just want to toss my $.02 in here for what it's worth...

While you explained what it was that you were trying to achieve or what you felt you saw in your mind's eye as it were, I have to say that none of that would have been remotely clear if you had not of explained it. Personally I'm a "a cigar is just a cigar" kind of guy and I try to avoid conceptual art precisely for this reason. Some people can look at clouds for example and see everything from Volkswagens to Dragons...I see clouds. Ok...ok...I can see the "dipper" in the Big Dipper but beats me how the devil folks get a bear out of that! LOL!!! Anyways, when you are trying to convey something that "you see in your mind" in any given scene, you need to make sure that it's fairly clear to most people as well otherwise it's not going to make much sense to anyone but you.

In the case of your image here you said the assignment was "a landscape" and while I could be wrong, I don't think most people will see a baseball stadium as such. For better or worse, I believe that when most people think "landscape", they tend to think grand, sweeping vistas, sunrises/sunsets, occasionally farms, etc.. Images such as Ansel Adams created of Yellowstone (and other National Parks) or shots of the Grand Canyon instantly come to mind. A baseball stadium is something that I think most folks would associate with "city scape" instead...which for all intensive purposes here is a completely different subject.

Also, at the risk of being perfectly blunt...your sky is very blah. Basically a white featureless blob there. Next time try a polarizer when it's only partly cloudy or perhaps catch the leading edge of a thunder storm as it's rolling in for a good sense of drama :D.

I think you did have good color here, your exposure looks decent enough and you made good use of the rule of thirds. I think if this shot had of been taken around sunrise/sunset with a better sky and withOUT the baseball stadium, it would have worked much better for your assignment. A long exposure lightening shot...again without the stadium...would have been superb. I'm honestly not trying to be rude here but if I were your instructor I would have to give you a B+ for imagination based on your explanation but a D- for execution. My advice to you is to simply try and see a scene for what it is and what's actually in it...don't try and see things that aren't really there and then expect others to see it too. Sometimes a cigar really is "just a cigar".

Again just my $.02 worth and please excuse my cheesy Freudian quotes there.
Jim


PLEASE be blunt! Thank you. The picture is here because I am too close to it to figure out what's wrong with it.

The problem I have to solve in taking this image (it's not going anywhere, after all) is when they are playing the games. This Tuesday's game is an afternoon game, and I'm working; the next night/evening games are Friday the 29th (I'm working) and Saturday the 30th. Yes, I've thought about the lightning shot too! But where I would be standing with the tripod, not a good idea; it's the highest point around.

The landscape/cityscape... there's a good deal of leeway. The intent is "shoot a vista", not necessarily nature. But there is no time limit for completion (it's an online course). I can keep trying. I can always go somewhere else to get that landscape, if I can't get this one to look like what it feels like to be there.

[RMXSeven]

May I ask what course you are doing?

~Ronen

[shaneh]

When i read about how you would like to see it at night. I thought to my self wouldn't it be cool if you used a long exposure of the cars going out of the staidum?

You get what im saying??? But hey just my idea dont know if it would turn out good. Just thought i would throw it out there

[Zoso23]

I think it has potential.

firstly, I would re-shooting in the evening or early morning when the light isnt as harsh and the sky wont be blown out like it is here. if not try abit of HDR or exposure blending to increase the dynamic range, but be careful not to overdo it though.
the composition isnt too bad but maybe try adding something to the foreground to add a bit of foreground interest, maybe some different lighting on the trees if you did a night shot as you mentioned.
I would also try going wider. i would shoot multiple images and stich in PP to add a feeling of isolation to the stadium and add to that "pond" concept that you mentioned.

thats just some of my thoughts, hope they help.
good luck with the class.

[Mosca]

May I ask what course you are doing?

~Ronen

The Proud Photography basic class. It's helped me through a lot of the stuff that I would have had to figure out by trial and error. For a rank beginner, I would say it's a far better $100 spent than on a 50mm 1.8, for example.

Thanks for all the suggestions. I think I'm going to wait until next weekend and get that evening shot. Zoso, I thought about the stitching as well, and I might do that--not as the assignment but rather for my own enjoyment. The shot you see is at 11mm (on a 40D).

[Zoso23]

The Proud Photography basic class. It's helped me through a lot of the stuff that I would have had to figure out by trial and error. For a rank beginner, I would say it's a far better $100 spent than on a 50mm 1.8, for example.

Thanks for all the suggestions. I think I'm going to wait until next weekend and get that evening shot. Zoso, I thought about the stitching as well, and I might do that--not as the assignment but rather for my own enjoyment. The shot you see is at 11mm (on a 40D).

no worries at all.
and making some really wide panoramas with stiching is great fun. there are some great sites out there with tutorials on how to best shoot the photos and then stich them.
best of luck and enjoy it.