Newfag here, I really like shooting buildings but don't really know what to do beyond hurr durr point and shoot so any criticism or advice is appreciated.(1/15)
couldn't choose between these two, no idea what to look for but I think I like this one better(3/15)
(4/15)
(5/15)also fuck captchas
also gearino wise I have a used snoy 6300 with the 16-50 kit(6/15)
(7/15)
(8/15)
(9/15)
(11/15)
unfortunately no properly focused shot of this(12/15)
(13/15)
(14/15)
>>4520778Get a tilt shift lens if buildings are your jam. No autofocus but if you take your time you can get some very accurate, or, very unique photos of buildings.
You've got a thing on your lens. Give it a wipe...
(15/15)not a building but I quite like cranes>>4520795thanks anon, I'll look into that but I'll have to budget for a bit before I splurge on a new lens
>>4520796I know :((( I'll pick up one of those duster thingies tomorrow(bonus)
>>4520778>I really like shooting buildingsIs this something genetic in America? Nice to see some variety though, most of the other famous building shooters focus on schools or corporate headquarters.
>>4520800>in Americathat's Berlin lolIn my case I think it's just autism, they are nice and geometric and contrast nice against the sky, also they are incredible achievements of man
phone snapshit since I didn't have my cam on me but alas
Clean your sensor
>>4520778You can get Julius shulman’s “Los Angeles” pretty cheap on Amazon. That will probably help your composition
>>4521642Not OP but any other good architectural reccs for books? I've been doing it a while but would be interested to see more.
first thing to do is to find a building that isn't disgusting soulless modern architecture filthvery difficult to do this in most of the world
Are these photos edited?I'm also quite drawn to buildings when I see them, and I can't really explain why or what it is about them that I want to capture. I'm somewhat new to photography, so take any advice I have well-salted. I have no idea what I'm talking about, but it seems to me that two of the most common, or maybe best forms of building/architecture photography are to capture a more "accurate" and complete image of the building, and then just a little slice of what your eyes would see. And then they can tend to be more isometric or orthographic perspective.>>4520778>>4520784>>4520790These are my favorites, mainly because of the canted composition. I think the Dutch tilt does a huge amount of legwork with architectural photography. I can't exactly explain why, but it brings a sort of dynamism to photos of totally static objects that might otherwise feel like they have nothing going on. Looking at all of the photos you posted, I can definitely see it's true that you aren't really doing anything very stylish or with a lot of deliberation, but to me, these three canted photos actually feel very stylish. If you had posted only these, I would've guessed you kinda knew what you were doing, and not just because they would all three be canted; more because they genuinely feel much higher-quality than the rest of the pack. Hell, I feel like some of the others could actually benefit pretty decently from exaggerating rotation a bit to get a similar effect. I'm still quite new to adding any sort of particular style to my photos rather than just trying to make them accurate, but lately I've been playing around with intentionally canting my shots to force more emphasis on my subject or motion rather than just going for standard visual accuracy.
>>4520781>>4520783>>4520785>>4520791>>4520793I feel like these could benefit greatly from upright editing, and/or forcing certain lines or shapes to sit perfectly parallel to the edges of the image. Especially since these don't depict the entire buildings, you once again have the freedom of not having an anchoring horizon, so you can basically just arbitrarily pick a specific favorite line (maybe the most prominent one like a near corner) and align that one perfectly up and down while letting all the other lines do whatever. As far as I can tell, none of these photos have any prominent lines that are perfectly 90 degrees or 45 degrees in any direction. It might be useful to force some perfectly angled lines.Another thing I like about close-up compositions like this in architecture is that it all feels very geometric and "liney". You can't see the base of these buildings, and you get very little of the actual "body" of the building, if any, so what you have is a composition where there's a bunch of sky, and then suddenly, bam, engineered geometric lines and shapes. It feels less like a photo of a building and more like a canvas with distinct regions of patterns/textures and emptiness. I think the fact that architecture photography is so overwhelmingly just standing on the ground and shooting upward at something big really lends itself to this because you almost always have the sky in the background that acts as empty space. In a way, some photos of buildings feel beautiful in exactly the same way as photos of clouds in the sky. Which brings me to my next observation..
>>4520786>>4520797There's a style of photography I've been seeing lately from some people I follow (picrel). I'm not exactly sure how I'd describe it other than that the photo is basically just the sky, but with an extremely isolated object "encroaching" on it so that it feels a bit out of place. Often it's less prominent structures like those tall McDonald's signs, or a street lamp, or a really tall and thin building. In a way it almost makes the object feel like to a star in the night sky, or maybe something small floating in a huge body of deep water. For me, these photos capture that a little bit. I think it might be worth exploring this whenever you find a building that's tall and isolated enough to make it feel like it's floating in a sea of sky and disembodied from everything else.
>>4522730>>4522733>>4522735thanks for the replies, sorry I haven't been shooting lately but I have a new batch from today.yeah the photos are just unedited jpegs from the camera I'll look into editing later to play around with getting the lines straight and also I think this batch is a bit underexposed but can't be bothered right now hope you like these
>>4522652idk chudanon I quite like glassshit and brutalslop like this, it's all subjective anyways :p
birds
quite many birds today during the rain, it was really cool
I think this one is very weak but I forgot to say that this is it for tonight, see you guys later
>>4520778>don't really know what to do beyond hurr durr point and shootRealistically, unless someone shares your brand of autism, most people will find photos of buildings the most boring shit imaginable. So if you like it - shoot what you like, not what people might want. (Because they don’t want it at all)
why do you like to shoot buildings. Like what's so interesting about them in your eyes when you look up at them from the ground. Not arguing just curious
>>4523684>>4523685These ones are really compelling. A lively element helps these kinds of photos a lot. I like the second one better because it feels less cluttered, that's an extremely solid photo.>>4523682I think this one works well because, again, there are signs of life. People's belongings on the balconies give you a reason to care about the building, it's not just another anonymous box.>>4520798This is a really neat photo. His pants and hoodie perfectly match the cool tones of the concrete steps, it makes him look like a natural extension of the urban landscape. The warmer colors of his skin and hair make him human. It works very well. >>4520781This is my favorite from the original set. Just like the picture with the four birds, it's lean and focused. I really like the seemingly random placement of the windows. It makes the building intriguing in a subtle way. the simplicity of the contrasting colors works really well. I like it a lot.
Try playing with perspective more. Get up high and shoot the buildings at eye-level, or from above. Try to get far away and zoom in on two buildings you like next to each other, making them look closer to each other than they actually are. That type of thing. Most of your shots are, like you said, "point camera up, shoot".
these shots are from a couple weeks ago that I forgot about completely
>>4524327I just think they're neat. They are huge things that
I think this one's neat but maybe the side elements are too distracting idk
>>4524598 *>>4524327I just think they're neat. They are huge things that needed an incredible amount of resources and manpower to be built and they also obviously provide shelter and other uses so I think they are very interesting subjects to shoot.*
neat construction site
I like this one quite a lot
(bonus from the old set)
>>4524536thanks for the advice man, I'll try that!yeah most of my shots are pedestrian height because I just shoot on walks but I'll try to play around with different vantage points and such, for example I took these couple shots on a train which was fun
I feel like this could be a good crop to just the sign and the sky but idk, I don't want all my shit to just be object in sky
the crane also looks quite nice with the sky
>>4524455same building in different light
I think the colors turned out neat
and finally today's batch
tried some wide angle shots idk
tried some framing
also idk what the etiquette here is, sorry if I'm dumping too much I wanted to post my stuff on-site rather than a catbox or something
I quite like the colors on this it could probably benefit from a crop
I really liked the almost bridal construction veil but wasn't sure how to capture it :(((
I think this one's neat
probably my favorite of the set, I think there's almost a beachy feel to it with the sky and the orange sun cover thing
regular zoomslop shot
and a wideslop
alright guys this is the final one for today, sorry for posting this much but these were a couple weeks of shotstill next time
