On 30/3/07, Rick Womer, discombobulated, unleashed: >Posted a few days ago with no feedback at all. Since >I sulk when I don't get attention, I'm posting it >again: > >http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5782865 > >Taken on a nocturnal stroll in Manhattan's upper west >side a few weeks ago. > >Choose one: > >A. So boring that I fell asleep before I could comment >on it >B. So burdened with gross defects that tactful comment >was impossible >C. So ordinary that I just moved on to the next PESO >D. So ravishing that I was paralyzed and couldn't >comment on it >E. All of the above > >Rick
Didn't see it the first time around. Minimal impact on me mate. I think if you're doing a sign like that, could be one of several ways. Straight on in my book has to be dead straight on with verticals vertical and horizontals horizontal. Further away, longer lens, fill the frame, 90 deg to subject if poss, correct angles if not. Or, maybe a wide angle almost directly underneath and to one side, nice wacky angle. Or maybe with the sign in relation to the building or a person. Framing is everything in a shot like this. Look at the first pic up in this gallery: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/6510837.stm> In itself, the Queen sanding alone with the onlookers above is a nice shot. You can bet your sweet bippy that either side of her there are throngs of body guards, hosts, more onlookers etc etc. Selective framing has given the shot an edge that it would not have had otherwise. This technique is easily applied to the neon sign. The framing you present is neither here nor there to me. Too much empty space top and bottom, not 'straight' enough, a little obscured by building detail. Otherwise (what did the Romans ever do for us) nice shot ;-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
