Architectural Photography

Jalapeno

No really !!!!!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-45721160

AlexC

Can’t help thinking it’s a collection of images that would make for great album covers.
Some terrific shots there. Thanks for the link.

Gassage

Need some parts for my VW. Any links?

thumpingrug

The figure 8 running track is pretty cool

Rocker

Dreadful. What are they teaching wannabe architects in university these days?

Budgie

Rocker said:

Dreadful. What are they teaching wannabe architects in university these days?

Which are dreadful? There’s a mix there of all sorts, old and newer.

boogieman

The abandoned power station is really cool, I love stuff like that. Some amazing photos all round.

Nitefly

Rocker said:

Dreadful. What are they teaching wannabe architects in university these days?

LOL you really are becoming a dreadful old curmudgeon, @Rocker - how could you not love that old power station?

Nitefly

... and that reflection shot in the Milan Palazzo is fabulous!

Heartfeltdawn

Gassage said:

Need some parts for my VW. Any links?

Try the Audi TT Parts FB group. 

https://i.imgur.com/HPiz3cj.jpg

bingefeller

The Hong-Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Border Crossing Facility looks like a racing driver’s helmet!   I wonder if they had that mind when they designed it?

The block of flats in Lanzarote looks like a painting.  

Lots of Chinese architecture which is interesting.  

Rocker

Nitefly said:

Rocker said:

Dreadful. What are they teaching wannabe architects in university these days?

LOL you really are becoming a dreadful old curmudgeon, @Rocker - how could you not love that old power station?

Easy to understand how you came to that conclusion @Nitefly, my post requires clarification.

For close on twenty years I was a very active amateur photographer. During that time I had top quality Olympus kit, lenses and the ubiquitous Manfrotto tripod. I was a member of the local photographic society, serving as secretary for several years. The society arranged outings to motor cycle races, horse races and to well known sites. We had monthly club competitions both print and slide photographs.

During this time I took hundreds of photographs, kept copious notes of exposure details etc but I was never happy that the image on the print or slide was what I saw. Eventually it dawned on me that the limitations of photographic equipment was the problem and not me. What I saw was not captured on film. Despite me using the finest cameras and top notch lenses.

I got tired/sick at looking at arty farty studies of places and events we had gone to. The usual cliched photographs, horses clearing fences etc, worked but the pictures revealed nothing about the horse or the motor cycle. Or the jockey/rider for that matter. The smells of heat, sweat, oil etc were missing. Also the cameras ability to focus on the detail at the expense of the whole killed photography for me.

So when I see images like those linked to in the OP, they bring all those memories and thoughts flooding back. Memories of failures even if other members of our photographic society liked the images and deemed them winners of competitions.

That is why I think the pictures are dreadful. And as for the architects, they designed those buildings so they should be called to account for their construction and design. A number of those buildings are as arty farty as the images of them are. Demolition is the only way of ensuring that those monstrosities won't inspire young/recently qualified architects to attemp to recreate them in the future.

JezWynd

Rocker said:

Nitefly said:

Rocker said:

Dreadful. What are they teaching wannabe architects in university these days?

LOL you really are becoming a dreadful old curmudgeon, @Rocker - how could you not love that old power station?

I got tired/sick at looking at arty farty studies of places and events we had gone to. The usual cliched photographs, horses clearing fences etc, worked but the pictures revealed nothing about the horse or the motor cycle. Or the jockey/rider for that matter. The smells of heat, sweat, oil etc were missing. Also the cameras ability to focus on the detail at the expense of the whole killed photography for me.

You're so right. We need... Smell-o-vision.

boogieman

Rocker said:

Nitefly said:

Rocker said:

Dreadful. What are they teaching wannabe architects in university these days?

LOL you really are becoming a dreadful old curmudgeon, @Rocker - how could you not love that old power station?

Easy to understand how you came to that conclusion @Nitefly, my post requires clarification.

For close on twenty years I was a very active amateur photographer. During that time I had top quality Olympus kit, lenses and the ubiquitous Manfrotto tripod. I was a member of the local photographic society, serving as secretary for several years. The society arranged outings to motor cycle races, horse races and to well known sites. We had monthly club competitions both print and slide photographs.

During this time I took hundreds of photographs, kept copious notes of exposure details etc but I was never happy that the image on the print or slide was what I saw. Eventually it dawned on me that the limitations of photographic equipment was the problem and not me. What I saw was not captured on film. Despite me using the finest cameras and top notch lenses.

I got tired/sick at looking at arty farty studies of places and events we had gone to. The usual cliched photographs, horses clearing fences etc, worked but the pictures revealed nothing about the horse or the motor cycle. Or the jockey/rider for that matter. The smells of heat, sweat, oil etc were missing. Also the cameras ability to focus on the detail at the expense of the whole killed photography for me.

So when I see images like those linked to in the OP, they bring all those memories and thoughts flooding back. Memories of failures even if other members of our photographic society liked the images and deemed them winners of competitions.

That is why I think the pictures are dreadful. And as for the architects, they designed those buildings so they should be called to account for their construction and design. A number of those buildings are as arty farty as the images of them are. Demolition is the only way of ensuring that those monstrosities won't inspire young/recently qualified architects to attemp to recreate them in the future.

Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but you think the photos are “dreadful” because of your own failures? That’s an interesting perception. I’m not quite sure how smells would add anything to a picture of a building?

The whole point of photography for me is to capture a moment in time. The emotion, smells, sounds etc of that moment are evoked by the visual image of the photo itself. You didn’t need to actually be there to appreciate the image.  

Rocker

I have only a few memories of photographs that capture the essence of a building.  There is more to a picture than the image itself, the sounds of the wind, the smells of the sea - IMHO the photography process fails to capture anything other than what is in front of the lens.  And that is only a small part of the experience of being there.

Photography works well for small objects, it works well for portraiture but it fails, and fails miserably, for landscapes and buildings.  The scale, the magnitude is lost when the image is captured on film.  Looking at a photograph of a building is like evaluating a football player from TV pictures of the guy playing football.  Just can't be done.  Who can visualize the scale/size of the Eiffel Tower without standing below it and looking up to see the top almost reaching the clouds?  Any photograph of the Eiffel Tower I have seen, give no impression of how large it is.  That is what my reply to Nitefly was meant to convey.  If I have failed, I have failed in that attempt.

JezWynd

Rocker said:

Photography works well for small objects, it works well for portraiture but it fails, and fails miserably, for landscapes and buildings.  The scale, the magnitude is lost when the image is captured on film.

Ansel Adams, epic fail...

shrinkwrap

Rocker said:

Demolition is the only way of ensuring that those monstrosities won't inspire young/recently qualified architects to attemp to recreate them in the future.

Bad workman blames his tools and talks bollocks out of his arse.

not_the_dj

Carbuncle 

Budgie

Rocker said:

Photography works well for small objects, it works well for portraiture but it fails, and fails miserably, for landscapes and buildings. 

What utter nonsense.