Obelisk in place de la concorde....Harmony square

[Art]

Hi all, here is other Paris pic

Luxor Obelisk

The Obelisk of Luxor stands on top on a pedestal that recounts the special machinery and manoeuvres that were used to transport it.The center of the Place is occupied by a giant Egyptian obelisk decorated with hieroglyphics exalting the reign of the pharaoh Ramses II. It is one of two the Egyptian government gave to the French in the nineteenth century. The other one stayed in Egypt, too difficult and heavy to move to France with the technology at that time. In the 1990s, President François Mitterrand gave the second obelisk back to the Egyptians.

The obelisk once marked the entrance to the Luxor Temple. The Ottoman viceroy of Egypt, Mehmet Ali, offered the 3,300-year-old Luxor Obelisk to France in 1829. The obelisk arrived in Paris on December 21, 1833. Three years later, on October 25, 1836, King Louis-Philippe had it placed in the center of Place de la Concorde, where a guillotine used to stand during the Revolution.

The obelisk, a red granite column, rises 23 metres (75 ft) high, including the base, and weighs over 250 metric tons (280 short tons). Given the technical limitations of the day, transporting it was no easy feat — on the pedestal are drawn diagrams explaining the machinery that was used for the transportation. The obelisk is flanked on both sides by fountains constructed at the time of its erection on the Place.

Can you please critic composition the obelisk and the tower in the background?

Thanks Art

Exif Version=0221
Maker=Canon
Model=Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XS
Software=
Color Space=sRGB
Scene Capture Type=Standard
Exposure Mode=Auto Exposure
Shutter Speed Value=1/250 Second
Aperture Value=7.00
Flash=Off
ISO Speed Rating=ISO200

[Sistereinstein]

I can see a night shot would look really nice. Right now I'm a fan of nightlight starbursts, though I don't have any means of achieving that myself right now. lol.

I'm finding this to be a bit heavy on the right side and I'm looking for leading lines to help move the eye around the scene. It's a neat building, though due to the heaviness of content, this seems to be more of a "share your shot" type of post.

If you are trying to convey some historical value to this, I'd see if it can be done without the traffic - maybe create a montage of sorts.

[Art]

Thanks for your comments, I could not get back in the night to this area

[Michael_2010]

You might want to do something about the converging verticals, but it is basically a nice photo.

[Art]

I agree with you, but some time when you contract a tourist tour, you are rushing visiting a lot of places with very short time, so in order to select angles for example it is not easy as I wish
Thanks Art

[yzsutty]

I'm seeing the top of a parcel van at the bottom of your photo. I know that this site is busy with traffic. I understand why you'd want to crop it, but doing so also cuts the base of the structure and prevents the viewer from understanding the object's scale. On your next visit to Paris, you might consider including the traffic. The busy modern day environment is an interesting counterpoint to the obelisk's static poster and age.

[Art]

Thanks for your comments, I agrre, I also have some wiht traffic in deed
I will post later
Art

[curelightwounds]

Firstly, vertical lines should be vertical. If you have an image processor that can deal with lens distortion you can make the tower stand straight.

Second, yeah, cars suck. It's especially hard if what you're taking a big tourist thing, there are a lot of people and a lot of traffic that make it hard to take pictures. I can see that you tried to get them out of the frame, but either include them in the final photo or don't. Things that are incomplete or broken up that are generally familiar can be distracting. Half of a window or half of a car or just the top of a fence makes people think more about where the other half is or what it looks like. If you could have gone at night, a long exposure would have been a must just to transform the traffic into a pool of red and white light. But, yeah, cars suck.

Third, the Tower, I don't understand why it's in the photo at all. it doesn't really add anything to it and it's more distraction than anything else. If there was a clear line of sight between Concorde and the Tour there might have been something you could do with it, but there's a lot of trees that don't add anything that ruin whatever the Tower might have brought. I think you may have been trying to cram too much into the photo.

Specifically with the tower, there's no real gauge of distance between the two. If there was some sense of how far away the Tower was (maybe the long expanse of road going away from the Place) one could justify adding the tower by letting the photo show just how far away the Tower is. Otherwise it's just a thing coming out of the trees.

[Art]

Wow!! excellent critic, I really appreciate it
Agree with your comments
Thanks Art

[curelightwounds]

Originally Posted by Art

Wow!! excellent critic, I really appreciate it
Agree with your comments
Thanks Art

Paris is simultaneously easy and hard to shoot. Easy because it's already stunning. Hard because it's hard to know when to stop.

I love that city. I haven't been in years, I'm so jealous... maybe I should start saving money for a trip.

I'm curious if you have other pictures from your set.