Which photo?

sorry for dub post, but definitely click on them to see the full extent of them, it really looks different

i would say the 1st one man, i like how the tree on the left frames the picture to an extent, without the tree in the frame the branches look a little random and unnatural. Sweet shots though

1st

1st, but its not that much better, if your using a camera with controls, raise that shutter speed. The picture is way blown out. Notice how bright the shingles are.. do they look the same in the picture as they did with your eyes?

Shutter speed is not the problem here. If he went up, everything else would be dark. Shoot at a different time of day, the roof is way over because of the sun's position. It looks like it was nearly overhead, but more towards being behind the house judging from the shadows of the fence. The sky looks like it was overcast or a really light blue. Shoot in the morning or evening, sunrise or sunset, you have a decent looking scene that is being ruined by harsh light. Shoot when the sun is behind you, you'll get some nice light on the front of the house as well as those nice mountains/hills in the background. Take the angle from the first, the trees leaves will show some color in the foreground and background, or wait a few weeks and do this again when more leaves are red/orange.

I'm guessing this is your house. It's about knowing your location, learning the right time and then doing it. Also, it looks like you shot at a really wide angle. If possible, step back and zoom in while keeping the same composition to reduce the slight distortion. If you really want to get serious, get a ladder out there and get a little higher too. Also, get that playhouse outta there if possible. Try to convey a fall/seasonal feeling with the light. Go for golden hour. Got a polarizer? Use it.

It's not bad, but could be much better. I wish I had a location like this to shoot, it looks really nice there.

i think your house needs a quick paint job

Your creditability just flew out the window, changing the shutter would make it worse.

1 for the framing and light/dark contrast

Nope Im sticking with my statement. His black's could step up at least a full zone, right now the closest I see is somewhere around a zone II, push them into a zone I.  Plus anyone whose taken Photo 1 would agree that slightly underexposed grass is ten times better than a fully blown out sky. I am also assuming you are at the very least using a UV filter, but I might also suggest a very light graduated gradient filter to bring the sky back down some.

And please shut the fuck up eheath, we've all see that "photo" you submitted for this weeks contest. It was a joke, so go back to mediocrely filming great skiers in which you get some kind of credit for. We all know clown school was ten times better when Andrew or whatever his name is, was filming.

why not just crunch them all the way with levels?

better to get the shot right than to just post, plus for how blown out the sky is, I feel it would just turn into a murky grey..

haha its not my house, its just a house we were driving by


and the general consensus is the first because of the framing? i know they are both washed out, and you're also right there, it was a light blue sky around noon with incredibly harsh light, i didnt really know how to handle that

and if you were wondering i shot these on a nikon n50, really old film camera, obviously i couldn't see how the first turned out so i was still in the dark for the second

thanks for all the cc though!

Yep, the left tree in the 2nd photo looks so awkward, also consider taking a step to your left, to hide that blue building behind the tree..

Come on eheath, calling me out but not backing up your shit? And don't even play that maturity card because you had no problem arguing in the other thread.

first one, in general you can use the rule of thirds(look it up) to see what images are easiest on the eye which makes them a picture that for the most part looks better.  You also have much better framing in the first one but i guess you know that from all these posts by now

1 for sure

He wouldn't get the shot right with a faster shutter speed, he would just lose details in the shadows and get a sky that would be mediocre at best. In order to get the sky to look blue at noon in this scenario, the shadows would be pretty much straight black.

I was suggesting that he make the sky blue, I was simply suggesting he make his sky bearable by pushing the blacks up a zone (not much detail lost except for maybe on the top of the tree) by closing down a stop or so.

Ill repeat myself, would you rather have good blacks and a completely blown out sky, or a mediocre sky and slightly underexposed blacks.

Most everything's already  been said, but if it were me shooting i would just shoot less of the sky. The sky holds no weight in almost all photos, making it unnecessary, usually taking away from the main subject. There are occasions when the sky makes the shot work but not here. It doesnt sound like you can shoot this again but if you were i would crop out the top and the right side a little to focus on the house more and get rid of the sky, also getting a higher perspective would help and keep the fence outta the way. I would also take a shot for the house and the sky, correctly exposing each and then combine them together in PS, kinda like HDR.