Taken from the river show Tampa
Like the Painterly Effect Frank. Buildings are Sharp as a Tack. Sky not so much .....Whites are Blown Out in some areas.
I want to add this, Ed and I couldn't disagree more as to what constitutes a good HDR photo when it comes colorization and look. I don't want my photos to look like a regular photograph because I find that boring. However, when Ed points out overblown clouds, sensor spots etc., that does help me to become a better photographer. Thank you Ed!
Well, I'll take a risk and wade in here, if I may. Frank, I'm one who prefers that a photograph be undeniably a photograph; when I first happened upon the HDR images filling the internet (back in 2007 or 2008) I was awed by them; that term "pop" is way overused, BUT, man those photographs just POPPED all over the place!! The process itself was just overwhelming; as I continued to view wide varieties of photographic styles (which employed many different post processing techniques), I began to understand that (for me) the extent of post-processing often overwhelmed the photograph itself.... i.e. the subject of the photograph was lost in (or at least overshadowed by) the processing, and I began to tire of what I called "overcooked" photographs (and I overcooked a bunch of my photos, and stood back and thought it a good thing); now I judge a photo by how "interesting" it is, that is, as I page through photos, do I go back to review a particular one, and if so, how long does it hold my attention; and "interesting-ness" for me is a wildly moving target... I still like lots of overcooked photos, but I also like sparse, drab, faded, framed/unframed, all kinds of pics.... I try to be consistent in the way I judge a photo, but that consistency may not be apparent t many folks. An astounding photo of a vintage car will likely be far more interesting to me than an equally astounding photo of a flower (but not every time)...same for architecture, city-scapes, night-shots, interiors, even some portraiture; Ed's technical prowess is superb and he has such an "alert" eye, to be able to spot even the smallest discrepancy or omission. I like reading what both of you write, and I'm appreciative of your observations and comments, whether favorable or less than favorable... as long as they are always courteous and well-meaning, isn I expect they always will be. .. .... @franklamica
Uh.... Frank, with all that said, I like this photograph a lot, but for me the sky is unremarkable (not a bad thing, you know) but the foliage is oversaturated and wispy/shimmery; looks like what I get from Photomatix Pro, which I have largely set aside. However, the city buildings back there are really eye-catching (remember, I told you I LOVE city-scapes and architecture). Still friends?? ?
Very nicely scene and perspective Frank...! Bravo : )
Thanks and no problems Guy. I love painting my photos and frames and boarders and all of that. I still post a lot of the same photos I post here but with frames on them on Flicker and SmugMug. I totally agree with you that it's the composition that pulls me in.
little overdone, specifically in the vegetation, buildings are marvelous
I know what you're saying but I believe that the vegetation is what sets the whole thing off. I see that as the thing that pulls you into the picture because the buildings are pretty non-descript. I do agree that the sky could have been changed out but at the same time it fits well with the non-descript buildings and the lack of coloration of the water. In my mind and eye, the vegetation is what sets the whole picture up. I guess you can see how my mind works or doesn't work...lol Thanks for taking the time to comment...