The lights on the building and around it stand out because they are a bright colour. I think the way the sea blue colour merges into the deep blue/black colour of the background works really well.
The photograph doesn’t really have a story to it, as there isn’t much going on, it doesn’t have energy or any movement to it at all. However it could easily be a scene used in a film, such as an establishing shot. The photo has a certain peaceful feel to it. It is soothing to look at; this is because it is a calm, quiet setting- you can almost feel your presence there, staring into the beautiful view. I think the reason that the photo has such a positive, relaxing feel to it is down to the fact that the composition of the photo reminds you of a deep blue sea or a clear black sky. The photo has strong verticals and horizontal, which emphasise a static feel and the negative space.
The picture has a large depth of field with the two buildings the centre point of it. Only natural lighting is used for this photo, therefore getting the exact time of day right would have been essential.
The photo also has some negative points to it. The angle at which the photograph is taken from makes the picture looks really flat and plain, For instance if the photo was taken from beneath the buildings facing up towards them they would’ve looked much larger and maybe more interesting.
Photograph two by Tessa Musgrave is a very diverse type of architecture photography. This is because it isn’t really a picture of buildings, statues or towers. The photo has a large depth of field and appears to be a photo of lots of different coloured frames separating little rooms along the beachfront. This is a very brightly coloured photograph, which makes it quite a positive photo.
The photo seems divided diagonally into two different parts- one is very well lit and bright and the other represents more of a shadowed over dull side, which adds a mixed feeling to it.
Once again like the first photo, this photo doesn’t have a narrative. However, it is a very mysterious photograph- the viewer is unsure about what it actually represents or what it wants you to feel. The photograph is full of mixed emotions- it has a happy side, yet a dark side. The photo seems quite bright and vibrant, yet represents a sense of loneliness and seems isolated- almost blank.
Also you’re not sure what the purpose of this photo actually is. The photograph is quite meaningless, yet there is a specific energy about it as it has a sense of uniqueness to it.
I don’t think that the composition of the photo is great; and I don’t think that the tonal range is dramatic either. There are aspects of the photograph that could be given more thought and have been made more interesting. However on the whole, the photograph is a gratifying one to look at. It is has a well thought out composition and is well balanced. The photograph also has a frame within a frame.
Both of the photographs are taken in colour, I think this is a good choice because the colours help create the emotions and feelings that are felt when looking at the pictures. Both of the photographs are landscape however it could be argued that photo one is portrait as the tall buildings give the impression that the image is in portrait format. Neither of the pictures is experimental, they are both images of places that you would easily come across. However photo 2 is a lot more creative than photo 1. It has a little something to whereas image 1 is just an ordinary photo that you may see on a postcard or to advertise a holiday. The images include a type of landscape, photo 1 includes more of a city scene but photo two sets more coastal scene. I think that both the images are made up of colours that suit the image perfectly; however the tonal range of both of them isn’t outstanding and could be better, especially in photo 1.
In photo one, your eye is drawn to the two tall, dark buildings straight away, as they stand out from the rest of the image. In photo two there isn’t really any one focal point, however you are lead through the holes in the frames, like looking through a tunnel, therefore you are lead to the centre by the leading lines. Photo 1 is made up of quite a lot of lines and areas of tone; however photo 2 is made up more of different shapes and colours. Both of the images use natural light, which is, appropriate because that way they look really natural and not over-worked. Both of the images also have a large depth of field, which means that there is a lot to look at around the image; you don’t just focus on one point of the image, as a lot has been included in the frame.
When I first looked at photo 1 I felt a sense of tranquillity, the image is a very tasteful one to look at. Having looked at it closely I still really liked the image, however I thought that some of the tones and shades could be improved and the angle at which the photograph was taken wasn’t the best chosen. When I first saw photograph two I knew straightaway that I wanted to use it as one of my photos. This is because I really liked the uniqueness of it and the way that it has a hidden depth to it. After having looked at it closely, I still feel the same way and I think that it is a very solitary photograph. Photograph 1 creates a serene mood and is very easy on the eye, photo 2 has a mixed sense to it, even though it also has calm nature to it, the photo has a mysterious feel to it, you’re not quite sure if the blankness of the photograph is supposed to be negative or positive.
On the whole, I like both of the photographs. There are obvious features about both of them that stand out and there are a few minor improvements that could be made to them. Photograph 1 has a really nice feel to it; however photograph 2 has an edgier side to it. They both differentiate to it each other but are both equally as dynamic to look at. Both the photos are 2 totally altered types of architecture, yet they both work really well in their individual ways, both having their own highlights and weaknesses.