Which do you prefer: details or no details?

[milosh]

This was taken in Florence, my goal with this shot is to show the nice sky with the moon and the hill in the silhouette.

Now, my question is about the amount of exposure of the hill. I think I don't want to leave it totally black since it would be a huge negative space and draw too much attention. I made two versions, on the first some details are visible and on the second it's totally black.

Which one do you prefer (and please elaborate if you can)?

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe the detail in the first are distracting and maybe the second is balanced, I'm not sure...

Any other comments about composition or crop are also welcome.


Thanks!

Exif:

Nikon D60
Nikon 18-105mm f3.5 @ 70mm
Aperture: f16
Exposure: 2 sec.
ISO 100

Florence 1 & Florence 2:

[cyber3d]

I'd blackout the dark completely. Then my eye would go to the moon and sky. Negative space is a great tool. OR if you can get a day/late in the day shot from the exact same location, then edit it in with the sky and moon.

[milosh]

Originally Posted by cyber3d

I'd blackout the dark completely. Then my eye would go to the moon and sky. Negative space is a great tool. OR if you can get a day/late in the day shot from the exact same location, then edit it in with the sky and moon.

Thanks, but how exactly would this help to focus viewers on the sky?? Negative space is great when balanced correctly, otherwise it can become "a black whole".

[ravncat]

I like the dark detail (florence 1) shot much better. it gives a sense of depth and mystery to the black.
The black one (Florence 2) is frought with those specs of light - I'd get rid of them.
The lights are a bit distracting in both images, but I think they're worse in the silhouette version (florence 2).

[cyber3d]

I experimented. I cleaned it up in PSD and did a side by side comparison.

It is like an old experiment made in a college photo class (except that it was black and white split vertically). There were 2 smallish dots on the black side and plain white on the other. We were asked what we noticed first... always noticed the white dots on the black half of the image before anything else.

Try it and see if you get the same results.

[kcoppock]

Just curious, have you thought about a different crop? Something like the attached, perhaps? This way, you get the solid black silhouette, and no black hole.

[milosh]

Originally Posted by ravncat

I like the dark detail shot much better. it gives a sense of depth and mystery to the black.
The black one is frought with those specs of light - I'd get rid of them.
The lights are a bit distracting in both images, but I think they're worse in the silhouette version.

Sorry, but I'm having problems figuring out to which versions do you refer in your post (maybe it has to do with English not being my mother tongue). Can you please refer to them as Florence 1 and 2 (it's written above the images)? Sorry, and thanks!

Originally Posted by cyber3d

I experimented. I cleaned it up in PSD and did a side by side comparison.

It is like an old experiment made in a college photo class (except that it was black and white split vertically). There were 2 smallish dots on the black side and plain white on the other. We were asked what we noticed first... always noticed the white dots on the black half of the image before anything else.

Try it and see if you get the same results.

Silly me! I totally understand how this works, but I quoted a wrong part of your post here... What I wanted to ask you is how would having a daytime shot of the hill help focus a viewer to the sky. I actually have an exposure where the hill is almost daytime bright.

Originally Posted by kcoppock

Just curious, have you thought about a different crop? Something like the attached, perhaps? This way, you get the solid black silhouette, and no black hole.

Yes, believe it or not, I have the crop you suggested in original (shot in landscape orientation) but I find it takes away too much of the sky, I would like to show the full gradient in the sky, from those red/pink tones to totally blue ones. Hm, now I'm thinking about it again!

[kcoppock]

Originally Posted by milosh

Yes, believe it or not, I have the crop you suggested in original (shot in landscape orientation) but I find it takes away too much of the sky, I would like to show the full gradient in the sky, from those red/pink tones to totally blue ones. Hm, now I'm thinking about it again!

Figured you might have tried it. I really love the full gradient, so I can understand not wanting a crop like this. Maybe something non-standard, like a square crop? Just throwing thoughts out.

[ravncat]

Sure thing milosh - edited in.

[milosh]

Originally Posted by ravncat

Sure thing milosh - edited in.

Thanks! I think I'll go with the #1, and I'm probably gonna take care of the lights.