This is one of those shots.
I live near an office park with a pretty reflective building. I’ve been thinking about trying to get a sunset photo reflecting off the building for a while now, but I have younger kids and sunsets and bedtimes coincide with each other for a good portion of the year. One morning I noticed that sunrises were fairly colorful, but instead of getting a reflection standing in a field I was now in a parking lot.
Reasons why I’m not a fan of this shot:
- parking lot! I could crop it out, but then there would be nothing in the foreground and I’m not sure I would be a fan
- I shot this with my 35mm, which means that I was fairly close to the building and looking up. This means less sunrise in the reflection (oh, you mean that’s what the color in the bottom right is?). I should have probably used the long end of my telephoto, but I didn’t have it with me and also didn’t have much time
- The joys of architectural photography without a tilt shift lens
- I should have squared up to the building a bit better so at least one line was vertical
Live and learn. I’ll try again this summer when the sun goes down after the kids are asleep and I have more time.
I love the non euclidian wireless tower!
It really is amusing how not-flat glass windows actually are. If I ever take the sunset version of this photo there will be no tower, but that might actually be a loss for the photo.
The building looks almost transparent.
Edit: this is not the look I was going for originally, but I can see why it might be interesting.
/Edit
Another reason not to like the photo, lol. More reflection of the sun coming up would make it more obvious that there’s a building there. That’s actually where the idea originally came from: a darker sky behind a building with a bright sunset.
Take it as a happy accident.
You’re right / glass half full!
I like the transparent building!
You can fake the tilt shift look in a lot of editors. Assuming you mean adjusting the perspective so the top of the building has the same scale as the bottom. I’ve done this a few times with solid results.
Thanks for the tip, I will look into this the next go-round!
For one, I appreciate you being real with your photos.
Thanks! We all learn by trial and error, why not share our failures/learning opportunities for the benefit of ourselves (feedback!) and others (insight into the though process)?
Basically all of my shots come out shittier than I had imagined it, which I then use for fuel of my GAS. lol
Thankfully most of my shots that I don’t get are usually a composition miss or flawed idea. Sometimes even both.
I’ve found I don’t require a ton of gear anymore. Currently I have four primes and a telephoto to go along with an A9II. The primes are actually focal length pairs - two smaller/lighter versions and two bigger/faster versions
- Sigma Contemporary 35mm F2 DG DN. This is a great lens
- Sigma Art 35mm F1.4 DG HSM. This is the old version of the lens, but it’s perfectly serviceable. It is a bit chunky though
- Sony 50mm FE 1.8. If you’re a Sony shooter and don’t have a 50mm prime you should grab this lens. It’s very cheap new and used examples cost even less. It’s also pretty compact/light. It might not be the absolute best lens, and it’s focus motor is pretty loud, but it’s a serviceable walk around
- Sony 50mm GM 1.4. This was my splurge
- Tamron’s 150-500. Great for outdoor sports. My subjects are small (young) and the extra 100mm over Sony’s 100-400 are worth “only” getting 15 FPS
The fast primes, combined with my 8 year old sensor, handle low light just fine. My shots are nearly all candid, so I don’t find myself wanting for a flat
There are some shots I just can’t get because I don’t have the right gear, but I don’t fret too much about those.
I am considering picking up a macro lens this spring since I’ve sold my OM-1 and enjoy taking bee photos. In the future I might pick up a 70-200 zoom, but that’s not really a strong want right now.
