[fionaB]

this shot was taken at around 7pm from kincardine side of the forth. as always honest opinions and critique most appreciated!



Fiona

[Steve]

It's dark and moody and as such I can see people either liking it or disliking it with nothing in between. I can also see it raising the age old issue of how it looks on different members screens due to different calibration levels

Ignoring all that I think that the composition could have been improved by placing the bridge lower down in the frame and not splitting the picture straight across the centre. From what we can see of the sky it would certainly have been strong enough to carry and fill the extra space at the top.

HTH

[Angela]

I like dark and moody! I sort of agree with Steve that there is too much water and you could drop the bridge down with a crop, but I'm not sure more sky would balance it any better.

[Foxesbrew]

For me there is too much sky and too much sea i think crop top and bottom to concentrate on the long bridge.Its a scene crying out for awide view.

[Dabhand16]

I broadly go with Steve on this one. I like it, but maybe moving closer to, or almost under the bridge might have given an equally dramatic feel but with a different composition.

I'm not suggesting it is an example for everyone to follow, but if you check out my shot of Brooklyn Bridge in my albums, I'm a lot closer, and there is detail under the bridge as well as to the side. Maybe this angle would have enabled the sky to have been captured under with the bridge. This would probably loose the interest in the ironwork in the middle, though.

[skipper954]

Ahhh....this is an image more Fi like.

I agree, however, with the horizontal line in the middle. I would crop out a bit of the water. The sky is fine the way it is, but the water holds little interest.

And perhaps try a slight crop on the right side to see if you like it.

But overall, this is a fine, powerful image.

[Markulous]

Well, I like the sky as is with that sweep of cloud coming down from the corner, tho' dislike the burned highlights.

I'd crop the FG water - as mentioned, little interest there so I'd aim for it to get back to a 1/3rd

I would prefer more detail in the bridge, especially as it's getting lost in the land behind - like my silhouettes simple, clear and well defined

Might be tempted to then trim some off LHS - pushes main subject, bridge, onto 1/3rd

[Rob Barron]

I have been observing Fiona for quite a while now and she has improved no end. She has good ideas but she also listens to others when they offer advice so I think she will continue going from strength to strength.

This picture is sort of...

You might say 'Sort of what?' but actually that's my problem: it's sort of everything. It's sort of moody, it's sort of dramatic, it's sort of ok composition, it's sort of a good shot.... but it isn't great. As the bridge is clearly silhoueeted anyway, I am not sure it actually needs to be in mono. I know Dave will kill me for this but I do not believe every shot is a candidate for mono. Mono has awesome power to create truly powerful images and nobody, including Dave, loves mono more than me. But I believe it should be used when it needs it and this just doesn't really need it. The sun behind the cloud is very strong, a bit too much and so it has put bit burnt out areas around the cloud making it a bit too strong.

The comments about composition are right, the bridge is a bit too horizontal cutting the picture in half and the sea or river really doesn't have anything to warrant being 50% of the picture other than the reflection of the sun. The left side of the picture goes nowhere, it has nothing worth keeping. I strongly recommend cropping down the left and along the bottom so that at least we are given the picture, the whole picture and nothing but the picture. You could lift the dark areas a touch and just allow a hint of detail to show on the bridge, that way it would not be such a strong barrier between the sky and sea. I know this is a bit cliched but let the bridge not only cross the river but let it join the two halves of the picture.

Did you take any more pics of the bridge that day? My guess is you took a few so have you any that have a slightly better angle so that the bridge comes in higher and lowers as it recedes into the distance? You'd need to have got closer for that but you might have one. On the other hand, you might have been determined to get the light over the middle part of the bridge and so couldn't have done that otherwise.

I am not going to pimp this shot, but I think there is a better picture to be had so next time you go there, let your eye really explore the whole scene and see what else you can come up with.

Cheers,
Rob