What do you think?

Construction site photoModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Construction site photoI recently remembered this photo I took some time ago. It must have slipped thorugh my 'system'.
What do you think? ![]()
Looks like a partial view of a giant yellow mechanical spider / strider device, probably alien in orgin and contain advanced weaponry.
I like it because it could be a number of things and nothing really puts it into context, except your description of the construction site.
I like the bold colours.
![]() Dunno though, something doesnt' sit quite right with me about this photo. It's intruiging, but not very interesting, if that makes sense? Probably needs something extra to add a bit of context. Yeah, mechanical alien spider/man/machine cyborg thing for sure.
GC, I agree with Des. The colours are bold and work well togetrher. However the image does lack a little interest. Maybe if there had been something going on under the golden arch to add more interest. The sky, clouds and arch make a great background, it just seems to be lacking a foreground point of interest.
Cheers John D3, D300, 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 85/1.4, 80-400VR, 18-200VR, 105/2.8 VR macro, Sigma 150/2.8 macro
http://www.johndarguephotography.com/
Its a boom from a concrete pump.Pic looks ok.
![]() D3,D2x,D70,18-70 kit lens,Sigma 70-200mm F2.8EX HSM,Nikon AF-I 300m F2.8, TC20E 2X
80-400VR,SB800,Vosonic X Drive,VP6210 40 http://www.oz-images.com
simple and effective.
Saturation works well Steve check out my image gallery @
http://photography.avkomp.com/gallery3
Thanks for the comments
![]() Yes, I think I agree there's something missing from this pic. But for some reason I keep looking at it. I think it's the clouds.
Makes sense. That exactly how I feel about it too. ![]()
I like this, simple and it works!
Nikon D70s, Nikkor 18-70 3.5-5-6 DX AF-S, Nikkor 80-200 2.8D ED, Nikkor 60 2.8D Micro, SB-600 Flash, Kingston 1GB CF card.
Http://www.WBurnett.com
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|