DSLRUsers.com

A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.

Skip to content

A different perspective on Religion

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: 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.
Write comments

A different perspective on Religion

Postby smac on Wed May 31, 2006 10:35 pm

I went to a wedding in Townsville last weekend at St Marys Church (pictured). A very quaint church but with a wide angle lens and camera tilted upward it threw the perspective out.

I guess you could say that this is a crap picture with poor perspective control, or you could argue that this image was taken at this particular angle with the towering crosses reaching out to the blue sky above to symbolise that church is the gateway to heaven.......

Anyway, my question is....."do you think it is acceptable to display an image like this without correcting the perspective or should I spend time on it (probably with bad results)".

Image
'Tis better to have loved and lust than never to have lust at all.
User avatar
smac
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:15 pm
Location: Baulkham Hills, Sydney
Top

Postby redline on Wed May 31, 2006 10:40 pm

i guess it really depends on who you intend the images for? if it was for a real estate sale, prehaps yes. arty farty stuff, maybe not
Life's pretty straight without drifting
http://www.puredrift.com
redline
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:36 pm
Location: Melbourne
Top

Postby suzanneg on Wed May 31, 2006 10:43 pm

I think it looks kind of cool. It looks like the church is leaning backwards! If you fix the perspective then it will be a fairly ordinary picture of a church IMHO.
Canon EOS 350D Tamron 18-200mm
Just what do you think you're doing Dave?
User avatar
suzanneg
Member
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 8:26 pm
Location: Epping, Sydney
Top

Postby Raskill on Wed May 31, 2006 10:45 pm

suzanneg wrote:I think it looks kind of cool. It looks like the church is leaning backwards! If you fix the perspective then it will be a fairly ordinary picture of a church IMHO.


I agree. The image looks good as is.
2x D700, 2x D2h, lenses, speedlights, studio, pelican cases, tripods, monopods, patridges, pear trees etc etc

http://www.awbphotos.com.au
User avatar
Raskill
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2161
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Location: Rockley, near Bathurst, Home of Aussie Motorsport!
Top

Postby smac on Wed May 31, 2006 10:46 pm

suzanneg wrote:I think it looks kind of cool. It looks like the church is leaning backwards! If you fix the perspective then it will be a fairly ordinary picture of a church IMHO.


I agree, when I first saw the image I thought it looked like one of those 2-dimensional facades they use at a movie studio.
'Tis better to have loved and lust than never to have lust at all.
User avatar
smac
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:15 pm
Location: Baulkham Hills, Sydney
Top

Postby sirhc55 on Wed May 31, 2006 10:52 pm

Leave it - it looks great :)
Chris
--------------------------------
I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
User avatar
sirhc55
Key Member
 
Posts: 12930
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: Port Macquarie - Olympus EM-10
Top

Postby Glen on Wed May 31, 2006 10:54 pm

Stuart, your heading lead me to believe you were going to share a contoversial opinion such as "many religions are giant conglomerates which own lots of real estate". Then I open your thread and see a picture of a big house!

I think the image works well as is and shows some scale as well.
User avatar
Glen
Moderator
 
Posts: 11819
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Sydney - Neutral Bay - Nikon
Top

Postby losfp on Wed May 31, 2006 10:57 pm

I actually kinda like the distortion on lenses, it's kind of like having the lens stamp a signature on the photo. In the same way that you use the lens' focal length and DOF in an artistic way, you can use the distortion likewise.

Of course, it is all correctable in PS if you prefer.....
User avatar
losfp
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:45 pm
Location: Quakers Hill, Sydney
Top

Postby owen on Wed May 31, 2006 10:58 pm

I just opened the image in photoshop and did a quick ctrl-t and then ctrl-alt-shift and dragged the top out to correct the perspective... the photo looks more interesting as the original, however I do like it when it is corrected as well.
http://www.ausphotos.com - My Gallery

http://www.doesgodexist.com - a very interesting site.
User avatar
owen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1699
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 3:21 pm
Location: Nowra, NSW
Top

Postby admajic on Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:59 am

I hope u dont mind but I did a very quick correction to show the difference.

Image
D50 - AF-S NIKKOR 18-70mm 3.5-4.5G ED
User avatar
admajic
Member
 
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 3:55 pm
Location: Sydney - Bondi Junction
Top

Postby johnd on Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:14 pm

Smac, I think the original image looks just great. I wouldn't go trying to "correct" the perspective, I think it would make it look maybe boring.
I like the crosses reaching for the sky.
My only picky comment is I think it would have worked a little better if there was a smidge more sky in the picture.
Just my opinion.

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/
User avatar
johnd
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:14 pm
Location: Sandy Bay, Tas.
Top

Postby Ree on Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:02 pm

the original gives you a feeling of the building "towering" over you making you feel small. Sort of suits the picture really.

The revised one, to me has no depth and makes it a bit less 'life-like'?

Also agree with Johnd in regards to the sky and more of...
Cheers REE :shock:

"If you have time to spare ... go by AIR!"
User avatar
Ree
Member
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Glenhaven Sydney ^.^Nikon D70s ^.^
Top
Write comments

Return to Image Reviews and Critiques
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Copyright © 2005 - 2022 Gary Stark


Portal XL 5.0 ~ Plain 0.2