There wasn't much wrong with this 30's picture. I always like architecture shots and if you don't I know that you are bored. Excused. No more appologies.

I really liked this shot for a couple reasons: (1) the flow if it / texture / reflectance play with the still, nearly frozen flat water above to the rush down the damn and the ripples below (2) the perfect alignment of the service road with the light band around the waist of the building (3) the masculine/feminine elements (4) the opportunity for a two tone technique with he sky tone reflected in the water. Well, its "art" to me anyway.

I maximized the reflectance in the water above and below the damn; eliminated the distracting shadows on the building; added some highlights to the tree, pole, and handrails. I used deep blue to tone the water and a purplish-violet for the intentionally blank sky. I then did a Illuminesence copy on the water and applied the same sky color to the water. I like the end result and think that the color choices adds to the masciline-feminine yin-yang but doesn't cross the line into being surreal. Finally I added just a touch of yellow to the road-band on building to make the summary object a bit of a photographic element.

I'd appreciate comments on both the technical aspects and my artistic choices.

Thanks in advance for taking the time.

Just my humble opinion

I think there is too much contrast between the water and the rest of the photo. There is a lot of grain in the building, field and trees and the water doesn't have any so my eye is confused by the sharp contrast.

It is a GREAT photo though and like you I like the juxtaposition of the band around the building with the road. Neat

I think there is too much contrast between the water and the rest of the photo. There is a lot of grain in the building, field and trees and the water doesn't have any so my eye is confused by the sharp contrast.

Swampy,

Thanks for giving me credit for picking a good picture.

You are right about the grain. Its is a very grainy negative, especially since it is 116 format! All of is negatives have far to much grain by today's ... excuse me...Yesterdays standards. The reason you don't see it in the water is because I worked it over pretty good taking out both real and not real specks on the surface (Made up a new technique: Select Color (in this case the bright water surface) Copy, Paste, Select, Expand by 1 or 2 bits, contract by 1 or 2 bits. You left the specks behind when you did the copy/paste and filled in the holes with the expand/contract. Just leaves you with big stuff to clone away or whatever.)

Your problem is an interesting one. What should I do? It seems like adding grain to the water will hurt the effect.

Good point on contrast. That's a result of pulling up the highlights.

THanks. That's why I came here.