St. Paul's (est. 1890) . . . . IR
jeffmeyers
Registered Users Posts: 1,535 Major grins
I've been capturing images of rural Missouri churches for some time now. I'd be interested in your thoughts on this one. I believe I like the first two the best. The others all have problems, not the least of which is the distortion from the wide angle lens. Personally, when used right, I don't mind that distortion. But I'm not so sure about it here. The colors are a bit different in each, too. Let me know which one you like the best. Thanks!
All were captured with an IR-converted Nikon D70s.
#1
#2
#3
#4
All were captured with an IR-converted Nikon D70s.
#1
#2
#3
#4
More Photography . . . Less Photoshop [. . . except when I do it]
Jeff Meyers
Jeff Meyers
0
Comments
My Gallery
You have a way with that IR!!!
Jeff Meyers
Ana
SmugMug Support Hero Manager
My website: anapogacar.smugmug.com
killer.
I like #1 because it makes me want to go inside the church and look around. It really draws me in. The ones with the distortion kind of scare me away. My next choice would be #4, but the most interesting part of this image to me are the trees and sky--the church almost seems like an afterthought. Not sure I can explain why, but that's my reaction.
I enjoy church photos quite a lot and #1 is really intriguing to me. I see lots of stories in it.
Cheers,
Lauren
Lauren Blackwell
www.redleashphoto.com
Very interesting analysis, Lauren. Thanks for taking the time to write out your thoughts. I really appreciate it. And it makes a lot of sense, too!
Jeff Meyers
http://danielplumer.com/
Facebook Fan Page