Boring or Sucks? Wisma tower against a white sky

[Rev]

I'm curious. I love this image and I'm a fan of singapore's dull white skies because it gives an interesting effect on colors here. Yet I wonder how others react to it. What do U guys think? Feel free to share your opinons, good or bad, I welcome all....
Bad: boring subject, boring white sky
Good: perspective? colors? geometrical patterns?

 

[Moonstone]

I think zoom-in more to exclude most of the white will make it look better in this case.

 

[sk.images]

Take another shot of a perfect sky with white fluffy clouds and then combine in PS.

 

[Edwin Francis]

Generally I find pointing up at buildings produces boring photos, but there's something about the perfect symmetry and converging lines that makes me look at it again and again.
I know I'm looking up at a building, but it sometimes feels like I'm looking out along a diving platform (or something similar).
It may work to illustrate an article about the blandness of modern architecture.
As an image of a building on its own, perhaps something to add a sense of scale (a window washer in a gondola, at one of the lower floors and off to the side? -- tough to arrange, just wishful thinking).
Right now I find myself looking at that one pane of glass that doesn't look quite aligned with the others (8 panes from the bottom, 3 in from the right side). I wish I could press it back into place!

 

[heroneo99]

erm.. imo, itz too "glaring" to be nice. i prefer blue skies.

the pattern at the bottom part is nice though. i noticed some different tones on the patterns, maybe can zoom in for some interesting tones.

 

[eikin]

i feel it's a boring picture

there's nothing wrong with the picture, but what make it boring are

1. it's a common view that many people know, see and can reproduce with a camera
2. there's no sign of a personal interpretation of the scene from the maker of the picture

it's more of a record shot i feel

 

[nuts]

Interesting.
I agree with Edwin Francis abt the symmetry and converging lines thingy, and that something small that breaks out of that (the symmetry & converging lines) may actually make the picture.
In this case, I may want to experiment with doing something to the shadows(?) on the lower half of the image...

My 2cents

 

[PointBlue]

Hi Rev!

I agree with the others here. Someone once told me that for a shot which is filled with patterns like the photo that you have, there needs to be a clear and intriguing visual interest, like a subject doing some window cleaning or someone committing suicide (jk!) This helps to enhance the picture by many times, otherwise the picture will only show a pattern that holds no meaning to most viewers.

The overexposed sky is distracting because of its glare factor. A non-photographer, however, will see this white sky in a different light, and may prefer it to anything else. I think this is because as photographers, when we see pure patches of white that we know is the sky, we instantly interpret it as a technical error.

The perspective seems to draw our eyes towards the top of the picture, like its trying to entice the viewer to look for any interesting objects there. As I said before, you need a visual interest to actually make this photo look like one with a purpose, and not just a showcase of patterns.

I love your other shots though!

 

[Rev]

thanks for everyone's feedback. Makes for an interesting read & discussion.... honestly believe it or not, I've never taken photos in orchard road and walked along it like any tourist would from the street. So this is my 'virgin shot' =D

I still wonder why people prefer blue skies & see the white skies as a technical error that must be avoided at all costs. It's like a white autumn snowy sky should be avoided as well. I'm not defending my picture with excuses, just looking to discuss. I feel a white sky looks as appealling as a blue sky because it exists. I feel it simplifies the picture, if not, it looks like the skies in London. Like a product shot, U see the product, the lines & the colors, the shapes & nothing else.

So... is my perspective subjective or misguided?

Thanks again guys,. If more people would like to share their opinions... would love to hear it.

 

[shojibake]

I don't mind white overblown skies, but the one here is pretty glaring. A closer crop would do the subject more justice.

 

[PointBlue]

So... is my perspective subjective or misguided?

It's definitely subjective. I never told anyone, but I kinda like white blown out skies in black and white pictures. Feels more classic rather than a dramatic sky with visible clouds. I used to have no problem with white skies in the past, but since picking up photography a few years ago, somehow the technical aspects seem to suggest otherwise.

As the others have said, maybe you could do a tighter crop and we'll look at it again.

 

[wind30]

personally,

I don't really like white skies because they are just not natural. The sky on a clear day is blue. On a cloudy day, there are form in the clouds, different shades of white. If you blow out an entire path of sky to pure white.... the picture must have something very interesting or there must be a purpose in it right to show the sky as bland white else it is really a technical error as skies are not meant to be pure white.

 

[CreaXion]

I'm curious. I love this image and I'm a fan of singapore's dull white skies because it gives an interesting effect on colors here. Yet I wonder how others react to it. What do U guys think? Feel free to share your opinons, good or bad, I welcome all....
Bad: boring subject, boring white sky
Good: perspective? colors? geometrical patterns?

Nice Symmetry. White sky a bit too blown up until dun look natural. I know that there are trees beside the building and therefore the lower levels has reflections of the trees. It became a distraction.

However, if there are clouds with blue skies, etc, the shadows at the lower levels may not be so distracting already as the shot has become a natural shot and a display of symmetry. Your pic now is a half half kind of thing right now. Like not complete. Half futuristic, half traditional. This is afterall my personal opinion and I am not gd with buildings. Hopefully it helps.

 

[dragos]

a close crop might look better...if reflecting something like a tree of some sort...lagi better

 

[Pablo]

Hi,

I am afraid that a blown out kind of white sky gives me nothing to work with the building.

That probably makes no sense..... I need blue sky and clouds.

..................................

This is probably not going to happen, (unless you know the right people and have a rather long plank :bsmilie: ).

I would like to see exactly the same photo, but from the top looking down.

Cheers.

 

[Zaknafein]

Hi,

I am afraid that a blown out kind of white sky gives me nothing to work with the building.

That probably makes no sense..... I need blue sky and clouds.

..................................

This is probably not going to happen, (unless you know the right people and have a rather long plank :bsmilie: ).

I would like to see exactly the same photo, but from the top looking down.

Cheers.

hmm, for me, i would prefer his picture as it is, from bottom looking up

 

[eikin]

thanks for everyone's feedback. Makes for an interesting read & discussion.... honestly believe it or not, I've never taken photos in orchard road and walked along it like any tourist would from the street. So this is my 'virgin shot' =D

I still wonder why people prefer blue skies & see the white skies as a technical error that must be avoided at all costs. It's like a white autumn snowy sky should be avoided as well. I'm not defending my picture with excuses, just looking to discuss. I feel a white sky looks as appealling as a blue sky because it exists. I feel it simplifies the picture, if not, it looks like the skies in London. Like a product shot, U see the product, the lines & the colors, the shapes & nothing else.

So... is my perspective subjective or misguided?

Thanks again guys,. If more people would like to share their opinions... would love to hear it.

there's absolutely nothing wrong with blown out skies. in the execution of an artwork it's really about how skillful the artist bring together various elements to complete an expression. if blown out sky does not contribute to a scene, no matter how romantic or appealling it may be to some it is still a distraction. you are right about blown out skies simplifying pictures, it does simplify your picture here, but i still think it's a common scene. a spectacular sky in your picture might enhance it due to the reflective nature of the building facade, but still it depends on whether the reflection will work to bring out certain unique imagination of the artist.

 

[Rev]

hmm... thanks guys. your feedback has me thinking on how to eliminate the sky completely... I thought of shots from the tangs multi-story parking lot but decided against it at the time .... because "which tourist would go there??"

Hope I can hear everyone's thoughts again... when I do a reshoot....