La Sagrada Familia

[flashback]

Hi all,
Looking for some input on these two pictures, one of which I have a sepia-ish tone and the other is black & white. Any and all comments and criticism of the two is welcomed and appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Jack

[PBelarge]

Wow! That is some building. I really like the detail and crazy ornamental design. I think I like the b&w more.

[flashback]

Thanks Pierre.
It's the Basilica in Barcelona designed by Gaudi.
I'm kind of back and forth between the two.

[Fit]

I've long thought this may be the least photogenic building in the world...

There's nary a pic here that is an appealing shot:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Sagr...w=1280&bih=637

It's gaudy (yeah, just my opinion) but so busy visually yet lacking sharp detail.... like a giant termites nest or sand castle. Shots taken from the distance your at don't capture how imposing it is. Further away are marred by the surroundings... I think it's better off focusing up closer, trying to squeeze interest out of a specific element.

It's washed out/a little too soft for my tastes.

[Donald]

Jack

I don't think there's enough of a tonal range to make a B & W version work. The building becomes one very large mass of the same grey.

[kdoc856]

I spent most of a late afternoon trying to get a decent capture of this thing. My humble conclusion was that there will NEVER be a truly good shot of it- closeups lose its imposing dimensions, stepping back loses the detail into a morass of monotonous monochrome. Maybe I'll try again in a few years when I'm a bit more advanced, but I'm not certain I kept more than a couple of shots, and those only to prove I was there

[flashback]

Chris,
Thanks, and I agree, it is an 'odd' building, bordering on the hallucinogenic.
When you say washed out, the sky, or that the building needs more...contrast?

[flashback]

Donald,
Thanks. I've played around with brightness/contrast, it changes the range a bit, but
not sure if that's the area you're thinking. Any thoughts on the first one?

[flashback]

Kevin,
I have a number of shots, from the side shown as well as from the more modern front.
Between the crowds, adjacent buildings, scaffolding and cranes it's nearly impossible to
get anything decent. The one I posted was the only one I considered half-way acceptable.

[Fit]

Chris,
Thanks, and I agree, it is an 'odd' building, bordering on the hallucinogenic.
When you say washed out, the sky, or that the building needs more...contrast?

Donald hit on it- it lacks tonal range... and so that large monochromatic mass disappears into the sky which is bright with no definition.
Wonder what it's like in early morning or evening light? Perhaps replace the sky?

More contrast maybe... but fear it just gets then more busy.

What does the color original look like?

[flashback]

Here is the original color. Unfortunately I never got to see it in the morning, but as it faces east-ish I guess it
may take on an entirely different character.

[kdoc856]

Jack,

That's as good as anything I came up with. Poeple not familiar with it may not realize that this is a building still under construction and probably will be for another 50-75 years, is massive, weird, and absolutely covered with construction equipment and scaffolding. You chose well to get this.

Kevin

[flashback]

Kevin,
Thanks. As for cranes, I had to remove three of them from behind the four steeples. Only wish I had gone inside
but the lines that day were ridiculous. Maybe next time.

[Fit]

Yup- I think I prefer the color shot.

[Marty]

Of the three as presented, I prefer the original colour shot. However, I think the sepia tint has the potential to be worked into something more striking and powerful than it is. The sepia does lend a certain "otherworld" feel to it, like something from Lord of the Rings. As it stands now though, it needs a bit more contrast and "structure" to bring it alive. As Donald says, the B&W is lacking in impact because the building is a mass of a single gray tone. The sepia suffers similarly but could be improved. Try re-working the sepia and play with curves etc., to see if you can bring a bit of punch into it.

[MrWilson]

In 1963-64 I had the opportunity to explore this great church building.

I was only 19, and stationed at an Air Force radar site near Barcelona. My camera was a used Argus C3, with all its' dials and knobs. I didn't know anything about photography, but I was learning. Barcelona was a great training city for a new photographer. I went to this church several times, and still remember the fascination I had with all the nooks and crannies. Back then I was able to climb up into the towers, not sure if tourists can still do that. I even crossed from one tower to the other using the walkways you see near the middle of the towers.

Somewhere I've got all the slides stored away. I need to dig them out and get them digitized, so I can relive those youthful days.

This is my first day on this site, so I was glad to see this thread as I'm beginning to explore the site.

[Donald]

Donald,
Thanks. I've played around with brightness/contrast, it changes the range a bit, but
not sure if that's the area you're thinking. Any thoughts on the first one?

I think I go with Marty is saying that the original probably gives us it as good as this one's going to get.

I did take the JPEG of your original into Silver Efex pro 2 and cranked up everything to get as much out of it as I could (others might do better) and got .............



But it's still a bit of a grey mass.

[Marty]

I did take the JPEG of your original into Silver Efex pro 2 and cranked up everything to get as much out of it as I could (others might do better) and got .............



But it's still a bit of a grey mass.

You did a very good job of it! - You like it too Jack?

[flashback]

Marty,
Thanks as well for your input. I'm going to continue to play with both versions and see what I can
squeeze out of it. Clearly it's possible based on the example below courtesy of Donald.

Donald,
I don't know how you did it but you got so much more detail out of the sky and I do very much like the outcome. Now all I have to do is to try and replicate it . So then Donald, are you in favor of the B&W or sepia? I have to admit I'm a bit more partial to the sepia but your version of the B&W has me reconsidering.

I appreciate everyone's comments and will see if I can tweak it into something less a gray monolith.

@Mr.Wilson - it would great to see your pics of La Sagrada from the 60's, be interesting to see both the scope of progress on the building as well as surrounding structures.

[Donald]

I don't know how you did it but you got so much more detail out of the sky and I do very much like the outcome. Now all I have to do is to try and replicate it . So then Donald, are you in favor of the B&W or sepia? I have to admit I'm a bit more partial to the sepia but your version of the B&W has me reconsidering.

Silver Efex Pro 2 is an remarkable tool and, it seems, is very much the 'tool of choice' for anyone who is serious about B & W photography. There is much that can be done with it that just can't be done by anything else. Although the master/mistress of something like Photoshop will be able to get close.

I didn't put any tone at all on what I posted above, although it could take it. But I'm not sure I'd go as strong as you did on your first image. That was a bit overdone for my taste. I prefer any tone that's applied to be much more subtle