Building Picture

[RbnDave]

Today, I had some time to mess around with photo shop. Please let me know what you think of this picture.

www.pbase.com/image/12306177

I took this picture back in May and forgot about untill today. The orginal picture wasn't very good. I did some major editting. Now, I like the shot but I can't tell if it looks too editted. Does it look like a cartoon?

Thanks

Dave

[Conk]

Doesn't look like a cartoon at all. I'm thinking that some editing was done to the sky but as far as I'm concerned you did a good job.

[slejhamer]

It's not bad at all. Can you post the original to compare? I'm curious what your "major editing" entailed.

[RbnDave]

Here is the original

www.pbase.com/image/12335256

"Major editting" might have been a bit of an over statement. I selected the sky only and used auto levels on it to make it look more blue. Also, I selected out the area on the bottom of the building were there were reflections of the buildings from across the road. I used fill flash on that area and also added some red to the midtones to make the reflections more visible. After that, I selected the entire building and used a little fill flash to make it brighter, and I added some blue to the mid tones and shadows. It is easy to use the polygon select tool on buildings because everything is straight lines. The last thing I did was use the clone stamp to erase the buildings that protruded into the upper corners of the picture.

I think that is all I did to this pic. The editting software I use is Photoshop Elements 2.0. I'm not sure if the comands and features are named the same on Photoshop. When you guys discuss Photoshop are you talking about Adobe Photoshop Pro? I am very new to photo editting, I got the software for christmass.

Thanks for the comments. Photo editting seems almost too easy. It is hard for me to tell when I have gone to far with the editting tools and the picture starts to look fake.

Dave

[Leighow]

DAVE

I am no expert in urban landscapes of urban structure photography. However it wold seem to me to be a nice shot -- and as memorable as any other close-up shot of a modern glass-sided building that I have seen.

But down deep these shots leave me cold. Nothing wrong with the photographer, it is just that the setting does not have enough content to stir the soul.

In contrast, the better shots Frank Gehry's Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain alomost bring tears to my eyes.
http://www.guggenheim-bilbao.es/ingles/edificio/el_edificio.htm

So, the challenge seems to me to be to find structures, or vistas of same that offer more soul.

HOWIE

[RbnDave]

Howie,

Point well taken. Glass sided buildings can be a bit bland. Last week, I saw a TV show about the development of the design of modern sky scrapers and how they are purposely built to look efficient...form following function. I think skyscraper photos are similar to photos of machinery like airplane or trains. They are more to show eginenering marvels than the art of design.

You might like this picture of the new Milwaukee Art Museum

www.pbase.com/image/11073615

I will be off line for a couple days. Thanks for the comments.

Dave

[thewhitenite007]

eh its all right. Heres two I took in NYC.

http://www.gallerypq.iwarp.com/images/building21.jpg

http://www.gallerypq.iwarp.com/images/reflection1.jpg