>>3355642>>3355624wooh the rule of the 3rds
but if the subject is so important that you pretty much photographed it alone and you made it look normal, natural (as opposed to, say, photographing it very up close or from below or whatever so that it doesn't look like a concrete mixer at all), why would you not put it in the center?
things look more important when they're in the center
this looks like a picture you might find in a documentary about building things in ports, it doesn't add anything to a concrete mixer you might find on the street, it's quirky and all because it's colored, but you're only picturing the item/subject without adding anything to it
>>3355626this I like better, the ridiculous distortion from your lens makes it look like a number of poles and pieces of wood point to pretty much the center of the frame, near the barrel
now, it might be "better" if there was something to look at there, this way it's kind of anticlimactic, but if that's what you were looking for it's all good
the sky is distracting though - it doesn't seem to add anything to the image, everything is happening down below, so why would you leave it there instead of cropping it?
>>3355628this too I think is fairly good, kind of "nature is overshadowed by shipping companies and business in general, but not entirely", the pallets have nice colors that grab your attention while the background is much more uniform, it looks like a real background instead of something that's behind your subject by chance
you might have framed it tighter, cutting the pallets, and that would have gone in the direction of "business is so big and pervasive it doesn't even fit in the frame", or the opposite direction, which would have made it look a bit more balanced, with nothing being half cut out
>>3355630this looks kind of the same as the first picture, distorted stuff that don't lead anywhere pretty much, empty sky and all, surely you get the idea
