Image not working. Opinions?

[tbob]

I quite like this image for the texture of the house. It always seems to fall flat whenever I show it to someone. I suspect it is for two reasons

1) the low angle, setting sunlight on the very weathered house and barn is just too red, monotone and flat.
The actual colour of the house is light grey and very reflective due to weathering of the aspen wood.

2) the large expanse of empty sky on the left is just too much.

However there may be other flaws, and I could be wrong in my reasons. I would appreciate any opinions why this is not working to grab the viewer so I can learn.

Just for a trial I did a monochrome, same result.

[mknittle]

Hi Trevor,
I think I is mostly the sky. To me the monochrome look better But there is still something that could be better. Maybe some ominous clouds? the subject matter is certainly good.

[Shadowman]

I think it's the construction of the house, it doesn't look safe; too many angles going in different directions and it looks like it's about to topple over on the other structure. And for that, I like it.

[Mike Buckley]

Consider cropping to exclude about one half of the barn.

[NorthernFocus]

Hi, Trevor. The sky is pretty plain. I also think the composition is less than optimal. Both buildings are two dimensional and are very tight together in the frame. If you had been positioned a little farther to the left the house would have been three dimensional and a bit more space between the two.

But my advice on either landscape or architecture shots is about as helpful as a mechanic consulting with you in your professional practice.

[Mike Buckley]

I also think the composition is less than optimal. Both buildings are two dimensional and are very tight together in the frame. If you had been positioned a little farther to the left the house would have been three dimensional and a bit more space between the two.

For what it's worth, I thought the same but didn't take the time to mention it.

[tbob]

Ah ha. Weird that I could not see the flat composition and strange wall angles until it was pointed out. I think I was too obsessed by the texture on the house. I will try this again once the sun swings around to the north again (after June 21) as the house is now in deep shadow from aspen trees. Hopefully I can get some clouds to show up as well.

[Wavelength]

I liked the original; in the convert the shading of cloud is unusual.... ; do you have that barn as the main subject?

[Dave Humphries]

I was thinking the angles would work better if it could be shot from a higher elevation, such that the lens is at the level between the two floors about same height as the top edge of lean-to roof.

The camera could then be kept level and this would reduce the amount of sky.

Unfortunately, I suspect that's not easy to achieve!

[selig1656]

The subject is lending itself to B/W more so, in the color version try playing with tint/hue and saturation adjustments. I like the subjects and would redo from various angles for greater perspective on the field of depth and less open sky off to the left , unless there is some texture involved , such as clouds or birds. I am far from an expert ,but I enjoyed your sharing. Thank you.

[tbob]

I liked the original; in the convert the shading of cloud is unusual.... ; do you have that barn as the main subject?

I do. I just have to reprocess it NIK to get it up to current standards. May be a bit before I get around to it

[tbob]

I was thinking the angles would work better if it could be shot from a higher elevation, such that the lens is at the level between the two floors about same height as the top edge of lean-to roof.

The camera could then be kept level and this would reduce the amount of sky.

Unfortunately, I suspect that's not easy to achieve!

I may resort to my trick of setting the tripod on the tail gate of my truck. For even greater height I will set up on the canopy cover. The problem may arise that I cannot drive to the site; I cannot remember if it has road access or if I have to walk in.

[Geoff F]

Consider cropping to exclude about one half of the barn.

I think you may get away with a slightly less severe crop from the top and left which keeps that distant building intact but close to the edge. That would still give more impact to the main structure.

For me, the B&W doesn't really work because of that pale distant sky colour. In colour, it nicely blends from deep to very pale blue; but the monochrome effect gives a somewhat unnatural looking bright area around the skyline.

[NorthernFocus]

Trevor, I can see how you got wrapped into the texture. Before my prior comments I hadn't opened the larger version of the image. In the large version my eye immediately goes to the texture and detail of the siding. What length lens were you shooting? I still think a slightly different angle will help, but understandable that your focus was on he texture. I looks 3D in the large version of he image.

[tbob]

Trevor, I can see how you got wrapped into the texture. Before my prior comments I hadn't opened the larger version of the image. In the large version my eye immediately goes to the texture and detail of the siding. What length lens were you shooting? I still think a slightly different angle will help, but understandable that your focus was on he texture. I looks 3D in the large version of he image.

Shot with a Nikon D40 with a 18-55mm f3.5-5.5 at 26 mm. I suspect I am too low. I have since learned not to have the building so deformed. This was 4 years ago.

[HaseebM]

If you crop the tree goes away. I like the image as it is.

[FrankMi]

Hi Trevor, you have had some great suggestions offered. Here are some I don't think were mentioned.

I see two prominent objects competing for attention. So what are the attention getters in this image?
What I notice is the following:

Detail. Both structures a well detailed.
Size. Both structures are relatively large and prominent in the image.
Colour. Both structures had identical colouring.
Shape. Both structures have similar shapes.

There are a number of ways to get one building to complement the other, rather then compete for the viewer's attention.

What if you used a shallow DoF on the house and let the barn recent into the background by being less sharp?
What if you used a wider angle lens so that the barn was more distant and the house was significantly more prominent than the barn?
What if you were to shoot a bit more from the left to give more separation of the two?
What if you only part of the barn was in the image?

Artistically, an odd number of similar objects works better then an even number. What if, due to the shooting angle, the barn wasn't in the image?

Hopefully this will give you some options to consider.