1930s Gas Station

[wizard509]

Personally I like it like this. I think removing the pole and telephone lines might be a mistake, in my opinion they do serve a purpose with the line leading to the station. I am a fan of leading they eye with various pointers. So with that said the only constructive advice I might offer is perhaps a figure or two at the office door perhaps conversing, constructed in such a way to act as a pointer to the car. Then you would have a complete circuit leading the eye. To the car then up the pole, down the wire, to the figures to the car, round and round. "dirty up" I don't know, I suspect there was pride in keeping it looking good and inviting. Granted there would be ware and tear on the place but unless it was there for a considerable time that would probably be minimal. Just my opinion of course.

Well done Ron.

[ss-kalm]

I like the pole too. Keep it in!

[Psaumure]

All these rules will drive you crazy Ron. You have two things going on and you need to choose what you were trying to accomplish in your picture. One, you are trying to feature your car or you're trying to feature the image. If you're trying to feature your car, your car should take up two thirds of your image. The background should not be drawing your eye away from the featured image. People, phone poles, fences... The detail of the background does not really matter and should not be the focus. A portrait like you have done include all of the above and your car becomes part of the artwork. Everything in your current image looks great and makes for a wonderful piece of art that you can be proud of. I don't want to clutter this thread with my images, so I will follow up on The other thread that you started. Working on developing backgrounds .

Again, great work Ron,

Paul

[Ron Duke]

Larry: As you know, I have great appreciation for ALL your help and direction. You've been tremendous and insightful. Thanks for your observations and suggestions. Really appreciate it!
Keith: Thanks for the encouragement and sharing your opinion.
Paul: You've been a real boost to me, especially as of late. Your observations and recommendations have helped me to look at things with a wider and still increasing perspective. Thanks loads!

[Ron Duke]

Ok. I'm really looking for straight forward critiques here; like you all have been doing. I have put up the Gas station pic with the rule of thirds lines showing.
Your observations and critiques on how everything lines up to the rule of thirds would be greatly appreciated. This will help me in my learning process a great deal, I think.

[wizard509]

Frankly I like it the way it is without the rule of thirds showing of course. There are a couple of things that bother me though.
1. The sky is fine but the stars seem to bright and kind of detract.
2. I only just figured out that those are probably oil cans on a rack in front of the white car. They have bothered me for awhile now and I think the colors are too much the same as the colors of the white car and may be unnecessary. To me at least the oil cans at least need a color change because they cause a confusion with the white car.

It has been commented that the fence bothered someone and is unnecessary, with that I do not agree, I like it although it might be a bit bright.

If you are thinking of moving things a bit to fit those rule of 3rds lines, I wouldn't.

I was just thinking, you could probably do with a little less sky and more to the left side so the front car is not crowding the left of the "canvas". Your call here.
Actually the rule of 3rds might apply very well to the sky. To tell the truth I never bothered much with that rule, I mostly went by what looked good. but in this case a bit less sky and a bit more drive might make sense.

I noticed the figure at the door. Good going.

[Ron Duke]

Unfortunately the drawing has to fit the canvas, and apparently COSTCO, who has the best prices on printing by FAR, has size choices that don't work with the 1:1.62 ratio. I haven't checked their photo print ratios, but would assume they work with camera photos. Frames are not a problem because COSTCO provides frames for all size prints and canvas if you want them.
The only RULE that I can see that will work is the "rule of thirds" in my case, because of the limitations my printer, COSTCO, puts on me.

[gray]

Your eye goes naturally to the first car and person cleaning the windshield which is where the two lines cross. The other intersection point is the car and pumps behind. The building roof line is very close as well. It's too bad you couldn't crop it down to the 1:1.62 ratio, but I know you can't do that. This image is striking because of where you've placed the interest points. It's also good to have horizons close to one of the vertical lines if possible, but not in this work. I still think the pole and number and brightness of stars is a little distracting, but that's just a personal opinion. It's your work and what you like is the final word. Great piece of work by the way, Ron. I'm sure you could sell prints of these.

[Psaumure]

Ron, I have made some modifications to your image to help explained some perspective that may help with your image. Easy stuff, but I didn't want to post any changes to your image without you're permission. Let me know if it's ok or PM me.

Paul

[Ron Duke]

Paul, I want to acknowledge your VERY generous offer, but RESPECTFULLY decline. Any changes and adjustments I want to be by me based purely on what I can glean from knowledgeable persons such as yourself, so that it still remains my work with the tutelage of you all.

I'm attaching the pic this time with everything lifted to a higher plain, thus showing less sky and more ground. I'm going to have to go back and reread the article concerning the part regarding the "horizon" in the "rule of thirds". I think I missed something there. (A thought just came to me: "why didn't I do the rereading before posting this?" Answer: "because I don't think long and hard enough before acting.")
P.S. If I dim the stars anymore nobody will be able to see them. This is in a rural area after all.