Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
Thread started 23 Mar 2012 (Friday) 23:45
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Architectural - Patio shot - need harsh critique

 
stayhumble
Goldmember
1,328 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
     
Mar 23, 2012 23:45 |  #1
bannedPermanent ban

I am a contract photographer for a patio company and strive to produce the best work with the amounted time i have.

I appreciate any and all PROFESSIONAL comments and suggestions. I'm only here to learn.

I would prefer advice from working professionals who know whats expected as an interior/architectural photographer, but wouldnt mind other advice.

And yes, I should have shot a later time, but this is the time I HAD to shoot at.

Thanks in advance

IMAGE: http://pcdn.500px.net/6022307/aff2bfd7241a4f4417cf70126df7106ed27445b4/4.jpg

There are no rules for a good photograph and there are no excuses for a bad one.
SELLING:40D, 50D, 10-22, Tamron 17-50 non VC, 5D, 14MM II, 24-105, 70-200 f/4 IS, 430EX, 530EX (ALL MINT W/Box)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tmoore323
Goldmember
Avatar
1,945 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2010
     
Mar 24, 2012 00:52 |  #2

I'm thinking something more like this:

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i1259.photobuck​et.com/albums/ii547/tm​oore323/4.png (external link)



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Titus213
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,401 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 30
Joined Feb 2005
Location: Kalama, WA USA
     
Mar 24, 2012 01:02 |  #3

I would think...a different angle would be better here.

Since there is nothing of dramatic interest on the right of the image what would it look like if you took a couple steps to the right and shot the back of the house and the deck? Wide angle, cover the back of the house, the deck, and the upper room. I would also shoot landscape orientation.

tmoores edit helps a bunch.


Dave
Perspiring photographer.
Visit NorwoodPhotos.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
argyle
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,187 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2007
Location: DFW, Texas
     
Mar 24, 2012 05:56 as a reply to  @ Titus213's post |  #4

Not a fan of the distortion from using a 17mm lens. If you're going to shoot architectural, you should keep the verticals vertical and the horizontals horizontal. Also, using a lens that wide gives a "false" dimension to the viewer...makes the room or whatever space you're shooting appear to be much larger than it is. Patio looks a bit cluttered in the background (what's that yellow thing behind the grill?).

The original is lacking contrast and doesn't have any 'pop'. Use of a polarizer would have helped to kill the glare on the glass tabletop (or enhance the reflection). A better angle would have helped, but I can see how the fence might have prevented that from happening. The edited version blackened the shadows too much and took away some detail.


"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son". - Dean Wormer

GEAR LIST

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qbx
Goldmember
3,951 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 476
Joined Dec 2010
     
Mar 24, 2012 11:22 |  #5

If the idea is to show the patio then a wide lens making it look bigger than it is - is probably a good idea. Plus you got some of the overhead room in the frame as a bonus. I think Tmoore's edit is about right because the shadow detail that is lost is not important to the main point of the image. Given the geography there I doubt another angle would be workable.


-- Image Editing OK --

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
argyle
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,187 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2007
Location: DFW, Texas
     
Mar 24, 2012 14:49 as a reply to  @ Qbx's post |  #6

If the goal is to just show the patio (I'm assuming you mean the tiling/stonework), then it would be best to remove everything (furniture, grill, clutter) before shooting so as to make the stonework the center of attention. If the goal is to show the patio as an outdoor living space, then everything should complement one another, with detail. The chosen focal length and angle really stretches the patio length, to the point where the table at the far end seems waaaaay far away. IMO, the over-saturated reds in the edit are now the first thing that one's eyes lock onto, making the tiled floor an afterthought.


"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son". - Dean Wormer

GEAR LIST

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kooker
Member
42 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Mar 25, 2012 18:40 |  #7

argyle wrote in post #14145912 (external link)
If the goal is to just show the patio (I'm assuming you mean the tiling/stonework), then it would be best to remove everything (furniture, grill, clutter) before shooting so as to make the stonework the center of attention. If the goal is to show the patio as an outdoor living space, then everything should complement one another, with detail. The chosen focal length and angle really stretches the patio length, to the point where the table at the far end seems waaaaay far away. IMO, the over-saturated reds in the edit are now the first thing that one's eyes lock onto, making the tiled floor an afterthought.

How about moving the furniture closer to the grill, so that stonework is clearly visible in the foreground and the furniture in the background suggests wonderful outdoor living space. Not a professional thought.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mltn
Senior Member
353 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Sep 2010
     
Mar 25, 2012 22:52 |  #8

argyle wrote in post #14144034 (external link)
Not a fan of the distortion from using a 17mm lens. If you're going to shoot architectural, you should keep the verticals vertical and the horizontals horizontal. Also, using a lens that wide gives a "false" dimension to the viewer...makes the room or whatever space you're shooting appear to be much larger than it is. Patio looks a bit cluttered in the background (what's that yellow thing behind the grill?).

The original is lacking contrast and doesn't have any 'pop'. Use of a polarizer would have helped to kill the glare on the glass tabletop (or enhance the reflection). A better angle would have helped, but I can see how the fence might have prevented that from happening. The edited version blackened the shadows too much and took away some detail.

I agree with all of this except for the angle. This angle has been used many times, and it often looks good, as long as the verticals are perfectly vertical, which they are slightly off in some parts.

If he was perfectly straight on here, then part of the frame would include the side of the house, which I think would be distracting. Part of the appeal of this photo is the view that goes along with the patio.

Was the original an HDR? It's got some serious weird things happening in the shadows.

I don't mind the distortion, only that there's a discernable object in the part of the frame that's distorted, if that makes sense. So at the bottom, there shouldn't be a chair going out of the frame, because the distortion makes it distracting. That whole furniture set is kind of distorted, and I wish there was a lot more space between the bottom of the frame and the furniture.

Did you shoot this on a tripod? Ideally you would set up the shot, and then be able to move things around so you could easily mask them in or out of the photo. So you could have an empty patio, or you could only have certain furniture items. This would take a while, but it's tough to judge how to style a space like this.

Also if you have any strobes or speedlites, you could light different parts of the image and have a better control on the exposure. This is also time consuming, but the results will be much better than HDR, check out this article where Frank Meyl discusses this technique:

http://www.thefstopmag​.com/?p=1093 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,210 views & 0 likes for this thread
Architectural - Patio shot - need harsh critique
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bushpilot
663 guests, 314 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.