Which is better?

We are in complete agreement, Sharon. I suppose. with a LOT more work, the image could be made almost believable, but I certainly don't think it's worth the time, other than as a learnig n exercise. But I have lots of images to go through....
Yes, Latin.... Ou sont le neiges d'antan....

icepics wrote: The reason shots edited like this don't look right to me is that the sky doesn't really match the shadows on the ground. Even though you were shooting fog, enough light was coming thru to make some shadows - you can tell where in the sky the sun was even though it was obscured by the fog.

I'd go with what the conditions were, if it was foggy then you captured the scene as it was, that's what you saw. And looking at it again, you can see the side of the building that's darker where the sun isn't hitting it.

Arkangel are you taking a class on B&W film/darkroom work?

Sharon

I see what you mean. To me it looks a bit like the sun is coming from the right side of the picture. So with some darkening of the sky on the left side it might help things a little.

Thing is, it's not half as bad as you're making it out to be. If you look at the shadows on the ground, they're diagonal (pointing to the bottom left of the picture). The sky looks like it has the sun behind the cloud on the right. Therefore the sun isn't far off the proper position.

If John darkened the left side of the sky slightly (with a fake GND) it would look fine. Looks to me like some light is reflecting off another building and onto the ground, hence the light on the foreground (bottom right) yet the shadows of the people are pointing in the direction I said.

It isn't the direction of shadows which bothers me. As Stealthy points out, that can easily be made more plausible. It's the quality of the light, the amount of sunshine color coming through the fog which gives the scene a warmth and immediacy that the cold sky light from the grafted-on sky doesn't justify. To fix that would take a lot of work, at least, for me...I was only half joking when I alluded to the ethical problems of putting a San Francisco sky over Florence!

When I first saw the edited image, something seemed off, and it dawned on me at some point which direction the shadows go. I just tend to notice the light etc. but I hadn't thought about the scene being warmer and the edited sky cooler.

I think you're right that even if a different edit would be better I agree you have to decide how much time it's worth. Whether it's digital, film, or darkroom, some photos are worth some extra time and work and others may not be - I've had prints that didn't even make it from the developer into the stop bath, they took a detour to the trash can. LOL And some photos I've spent a lot of time on processing, like doing detailed work with some Spotone.

And you know you could look at the first one and how it uses negative space... sometimes a slight crop can balance the compostion a little better. (Can you tell I'm doing a refesher and reading up on composition lately?)

First Latin, now I have to try to use my high school French?? At least a quote that wasn't too hard to find.

The principal contribution of this topic is that it got us talking. Nice talking with you, Sharon!

I like the first one.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say if you just posted number 1 and never let people know about number 2, nobody would know it was edited like that.

The top one, thats easy

Scotty wrote: I like the first one.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say if you just posted number 1 and never let people know about number 2, nobody would know it was edited like that.

I agree that not too many people would look close enough to see what bothers me. And, I changed it in the album.

jeffsutain wrote: The top one, thats easy

Thanks for looking

Scotty wrote: I like the first one.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say if you just posted number 1 and never let people know about number 2, nobody would know it was edited like that.

Maybe a couple people might not be able to tell but I could tell right off the bat. The light being absorbed by the building and street is much different in temperature and intensity than the light in the sky. I'm not knocking it, i think it looks cool (as i posted on the other page), it's a really neat creation.... it was just easy for me to tell. Light just doesn't work that way

I knew you'd see it! It takes a film shooter to pay that close attention to the light.

I am with Karl and Sharon- I prefer the original version. Again for reasons John has already pointed out. I tend to be a minimal processor, then again that may be as I am not nearly as skilled at this type of post as other photographers.

Not that hard, unless you want to make it perfect. The question for me usually is not" how" as much as "why"

icepics wrote: The reason shots edited like this don't look right to me is that the sky doesn't really match the shadows on the ground. Even though you were shooting fog, enough light was coming thru to make some shadows - you can tell where in the sky the sun was even though it was obscured by the fog.

I'd go with what the conditions were, if it was foggy then you captured the scene as it was, that's what you saw. And looking at it again, you can see the side of the building that's darker where the sun isn't hitting it.

Arkangel are you taking a class on B&W film/darkroom work?

Sharon

Yes I am Sharon

Interesting thread, this should really throw the cat among the pigeons. Follow the link below and read about Art Rothstein.

I suppose its a question of end use and although altering the sky seems innocuous and John you weren't serious about your ethical reference there is a serious point depending on the type of photography being undertaken.

If you did forensic/crime scene shots for the police you couldn't even alter contrast/brightness etc. as any defence may focus on manipulation of the truth. You know...what else was altered.

Here's the link iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2009/08/22/st...dlands-south-dakota/
and for what its worth I wouldn't have altered the sky. Too much like hard work, and anyways I keep quiet until I get caught lol.