Cadillac Ranch

[doctorjames]

Would love to know what you think regarding composition.

This is pretty much as shot, graduated filter fitted to lens, and im pretty sure all I did was a little with levels and a crop in lightroom. It doesnt obey the rule of thirds and this is purposeful.

The Cadillac ranch was part way along our honeymoon road trip across the states. Although this isnt the original site (the cars were moved) their orientation is set to mimic the pyramids, pointing to the Gods.

Be as nice or as scathing as you like. (but be nice about my wife).

James



Exif data
Camera Sony DSLR-A700
Exposure 0.006 sec (1/160)
Aperture f/13.0
Focal Length 18 mm
ISO Speed 200
Exposure Bias -1 EV
Flash Off, Did not fire
Image Description SONY DSC
X-Resolution 240 dpi
Y-Resolution 240 dpi
Software DSLR-A700 v04
Date and Time (Modified) 2010:06:04 02:55:55
Exposure Program Aperture-priority AE
Date and Time (Original) 2010:06:03 14:41:16+01:00
Date and Time (Digitized) 2010:06:03 14:41:16
Brightness Value 7.87
Max Aperture Value 3.5
Metering Mode Multi-segment
Light Source Unknown
Custom Rendered Normal
Exposure Mode Auto
White Balance Auto
Digital Zoom Ratio 0
Focal Length In35mm Format 27 mm
Scene Capture Type Standard
Contrast Normal
Saturation Normal
Sharpness Normal
Compression JPEG (old-style)
Keywords "Honeymoon America"
Caption- Abstract SONY DSC
Viewing Conditions Illuminant Type D50
Measurement Observer CIE 1931
Measurement Flare 0.999%
Measurement Illuminant D65
XMPToolkit Adobe XMP Core 4.2-c020 1.124078, Tue Sep 11 2007 23:21:40
Creator Tool Adobe Photoshop Lightroom
Lens DT 18-70mm F3.5-5.6
Lens ID 40
Legacy IPTCDigest DC382AC7F8D01CBC1BEF067FBCD996A6
Description SONY DSC
Subject Honeymoon America
Color Transform YCbCr
Flash Return No return detection
Flash Mode Off
Flash Function False
Flash Red Eye Mode False

[travelpat]

I don't really like that you give that much space to the sky here. It's not a particularly special or interesting sky. Assuming that - in your honeymoon - you want to picture your wife, I would have give more space to her and less to the sky.

On a second thought: It's working somehow but if you want to show your wife under the great and endless sky, the cars are somewhat distracting. I'd probably prefer either wife and cars or wife and sky.

[EOBeav]

Great pose, but your wife gets lost in this image. You have waaaay too much sky, especially with no clouds. I also might reposition yourself so that she is between the cars, not in front of one.

[flytyer57]

Definitely should have turned the camera in a landscape position and gotten closer to the wife. Landscape would have gotten all those caddies in the picture and your wife would have been more prominent in the pic. That sky is totally wasted as their is nothing there except the boring blue sky. Although it allows us to see that your lens/filter had some dirt on it.

And I don't think we need that much EXIF info.

[doctorjames]

Thanks for your comments. I asked for composition critique so the issue of dust on the filter for me isnt an issue to be discussed. As I said, almost nothing was done in PP.

I am interested with your views about the sky. For me it works, but then thats why I asked for critique as what works for one doesnt always work for others. What I was hoping to acheive was to have the cars pointing into an endless sky, along with my model (wife) looking towards the 'gods' also. Perhaps it only works for me because I was there and get the symbolism which you probably wouldnt if you havent had the chance to go there yourself.

I completely agree that the positioning of my wife, or at least my shooting position may not have been ideal. It does look a little like the man in the background is spray painting my wifes head instead of the car!

Thanks for your comments.

[Krusty79]

I think that if you wanted to direct the viewer's eye up towards the heavens, you should have shot this from a lower perspective. She would have to move closer to the cars and you would have to move closer to her. Right now, it looks like you were slightly above her, so it feels like I'm looking down at her a bit. If you had squatted down or even laid down on the ground and gotten closer, my eye would want to go upwards instead of downwards/straight ahead.

Also, I think the gradient is going against your goal of directing my eye upwards because our eyes naturally tend to go to the lightest part of an image and that's the bottom of it in this case.

Oh yeah, the first 7 lines or so of your exif data is sufficient.

[chriskey]

I agree....far too much sky...sorry,

[doctorjames]

Originally Posted by chriskey

I agree....far too much sky...sorry,

dont be sorry, its why I asked