Pre-dawn cityscape

[Kevin Childress]

Open to all areas of critique.

[© Tom Cooper]

A lot of detail, a lot of moodiness in the sky, starbursts on the lights, I like it.

There is a lot of blue in places.  I'm wondering if you deliberately pulled this out.  I just wish it had been consistent through the stadium seats, only those on the right are lit in blue.

Speculation: I wonder if removing some of the black area in the foreground would have been an improvement.  I don't think the aspect ratio would be helped, but there just nothing there.

[Kevin Childress]

Thank you for the feedback, Tom.  

About the blues: I actually de-saturated the top of the sky a couple points. As for the blue lights on the buildings, I didn't mess with that. Although I have decided to pull back the saturation on the tops of the two building on the left (I'm very happy with the top of the building on the right). As for the stadium, only the right side (which you see) and the left side (far side, out of view) are illuminated with blue lights. What you see on the side of the stadium is just blue light spill from the exterior lighting. The seats in the stadium are indeed blue but we can't see inside the stadium at all at this angle. 

The black across the bottom: You'll notice a row of trees in the foreground. Just on this side of those trees are a couple expansive parking lots. I really didn't like how the light spill on the parking lot pulled the eyes downward so I opted for pushing that area to mostly black. I agree the dark bottom is a heavy anchor - I just preferred it to a blank slab of asphalt. 

[© Tom Cooper]

So we are looking at the undersides of the seats.  I see that now and the whole stadium makes a lot more sense visually.

 

As for the tower on the right - I think it looks really cool the way it is.  Reminds me of a Jacob's Ladder.

http://www.askamathematician.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/jacobs_ladder_1.jpg

[Kevin Childress]

© Tom Cooper wrote:

So we are looking at the undersides of the seats. 

Correct, inasmuch as what looks like a bowl sitting on top of the stadium. I pasted in a URL below that shows that part pretty well, plus one side of the entrance from where that blue light spill is coming from.

 

[™Ken Kruse™]

Very nice. I like the colors, I wonder if the chamber of commerce had anything to do with color coordinating those blue lights.  Details exist in all but the darkest areas and are quite pleasing, any attempt to squeeze details out of the darkest areas would have made it too busy and cluttered. I like the dark band along the bottom and feel that it helps anchor the image and directs the eye upward back to where it belongs. My guess is that this is an HDR only because I know how contrasty night scenes are but it doesn't look it.

I have not seen many night-time cityscapes that were NOT panoramic format which is probably conditioning my thoughts to want this to conform to that notion, nevertheless I can't help but wonder what this would look like as a 2:1.

At the end of the day (night) you have a winner!

[Lady GooGoo La La]

I think a tighter crop would be better, less sky and perhaps just a bit less darkness at the bottom.

I dont feel the upper sky or darkness contribute much, but rather detract from the target of the photo ...the city lights.
This is my opinion based solely on this image, viewed larger I may have totally different opinion.

In reviewing many of these photos, when seen at this size I assess composition, but zoomed in, assessment completely different focusing on detail.
I think all photos for critique be viewed both large and small to give an overall assessment, otherwise a one sided opinion.

Lady GooGoo Lala

[Kevin Childress]

Thank you for the feedback, Ken. 

™Ken Kruse™ wrote:

I wonder if the chamber of commerce had anything to do with color coordinating those blue lights.  

I hadn't thought that exactly, but I leave room for the possibility. I was astonished they didn't change colors while I was shooting this, especially the tall building on the right which is usually in constant flux of changing color.

™Ken Kruse™ wrote: 

My guess is that this is an HDR only because I know how contrasty night scenes are but it doesn't look it.

Yep, you guess right. That's 14 exposures at +/- 1.0EV ranging from 1/320 to 25 seconds. But as long as it doesn't "look it", even though we know it is, then I feel like I achieved what I set out to do. 

™Ken Kruse™ wrote: 

... I can't help but wonder what this would look like as a 2:1.

Well, you did create a 2:1 monster in me the very first time you suggested it. This is my 'wide angle' shot, for what it is. I have a couple other tighter shots for the 2:1. Stay tuned ... 

 

[Kevin Childress]

Lady GooGoo La La wrote:

I think a tighter crop would be better, less sky and perhaps just a bit less darkness at the bottom. I dont feel the upper sky or darkness contribute much, but rather detract from the target of the photo ...the city lights. This is my opinion based solely on this image, viewed larger I may have totally different opinion.

In reviewing many of these photos, when seen at this size I assess composition, but zoomed in, assessment completely different focusing on detail. 

Thank you for the feedback, Lady. I have a few others that are composed tighter but I needed at least one wide-angle shot of this event, and this is it.  I was so happy to discover the camera had captured the blue in the sky that I couldn't bring myself to crop this one beyond the perspective corrections I applied (which wasn't much). I don't feel the primary target of this photo is the city lights specifically, rather than a nicely illuminated cityscape set against really nice colors of an immanent sunrise. 

You'd like this one at full-size (there's plenty of nice detail to explore!). But if I posted a high-res image like this for critique, I'd likely get far too much feedback on the 'detail' instead of ideas on the image as a whole, and that's not what I'm looking for with this type of photograph. From henceforth, you have my solemn promise that I will never post an image to this forum that isn't really nice and sharp in detail!  :) 

[gelu...@gmail.com]

something is wrong on this edit...

[© Tom Cooper]

Perhaps you would like to tell us what you think is wrong?