Options

Escher-esque Building

PhotoLasVegasPhotoLasVegas Registered Users Posts: 264 Major grins
edited May 21, 2010 in Street and Documentary
This was a totally random shot taken during a wedding reception last month - not exactly sure why we shot it. As I was editing, my trigger-happy "delete" finger nearly hit this one, but I decided to see what I could do with it.

I'm not 100% sure I like it - it's certainly not "wedding-ish" so I doubt the client will see it. But I wanted everyone's opinion of it as a "street/PJ" type photo... or whether it would fit better in another category OR in the trash can!

Honest, even if harsh, critique is very welcome!

871970197_N67tn-L.jpg
Las Vegas Wedding, Family, and Special Event Photographers.

Canon 7d
2 Canon 40d
70-200 f2.8L IS, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f1.8, 28mm f1.8, Tamron 17-55 f2.8, ProOptic 8mm Fisheye
And a bunch of other stuff ;)

Comments

  • Options
    RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,928 moderator
    edited May 19, 2010
    Hmmm...I suppose if it were mine, I would have posted it in Other Cool Shots. I can't get too excited about it, TBH. It does have the ambiguity of the classical cube drawing and I can make it flip, but I'm not sure it has much else going for it. ne_nau.gif
    My Pics
  • Options
    michswissmichswiss Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,235 Major grins
    edited May 19, 2010
    Love the light, the architecture, the conversion. Looking at the central corner, I'm wondering if it's actually vertical. Something is throwing me off. But agree with Richard that it is maybe misplaced?
  • Options
    PhotoLasVegasPhotoLasVegas Registered Users Posts: 264 Major grins
    edited May 19, 2010
    :) Richard, you can move it to "Other Cool Shots" if you'd like - we are not Street/PJ photographers but I thought it matched a few of the photos I've seen here of buildings, etc. It really doesn't matter to me how it's classified.

    michswiss: Are you asking if the shot is crooked? If so, yes it is, and by design... by doing the very slight tilt, it gives it more depth (IMO). It also makes the 2 angles from the top-left and top-right conform to the "rules" of photography, and of course the vertical corner of the building is really close to being "on the third". So composition wise, it follows almost every single rule... which is why I'm torn about it - I don't particularly "like" it, but I can't stop looking at it. Is it the built-in "prettyness" of the classical rule-following?
    Las Vegas Wedding, Family, and Special Event Photographers.

    Canon 7d
    2 Canon 40d
    70-200 f2.8L IS, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f1.8, 28mm f1.8, Tamron 17-55 f2.8, ProOptic 8mm Fisheye
    And a bunch of other stuff ;)
  • Options
    SimpsonBrothersSimpsonBrothers Registered Users Posts: 1,079 Major grins
    edited May 19, 2010
    I like it. It was tweaking my eyes. They kept thinking it was the outside corner of a building and not the inside. OI
    Simpson Brothers Photography - Facebook - Twitter

    Smugger for life!

    Most Popular Photos
  • Options
    AngeloAngelo Super Moderators Posts: 8,937 moderator
    edited May 20, 2010
    michswiss wrote: »
    Love the light, the architecture, the conversion. Looking at the central corner, I'm wondering if it's actually vertical. Something is throwing me off.

    I love it too and it is a hair off vertical
    www.angelo.smugmug.com

    Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
  • Options
    sabeshsabesh Registered Users Posts: 194 Major grins
    edited May 20, 2010
    Oh wow, very cool shot. Great job on this!
  • Options
    ckasparckaspar Registered Users Posts: 154 Major grins
    edited May 21, 2010
    SimpsonBrothers wrote: »
    I like it. It was tweaking my eyes. They kept thinking it was the outside corner of a building and not the inside. OI

    Why did you say that? Now my eyes are doing the same thing! Laughing.gif
    http://www.rncfoto.com/
Sign In or Register to comment.