JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
Do you have questions or curiosities about this image? Do you want to ask something to the author, give him suggestions for improvement, or congratulate for a photo that you really like?
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 253000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
sent on November 03, 2013 (20:02) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Hello, shooting is not just architectural, mostly suffering from underexposure quite obvious! Ciao, lo scatto non è proprio architettonico, perlopiù soffre di sottoesposizione parecchio evidente!
sent on November 04, 2013 (18:00) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
I do not agree with what he says Hypercri89. The photo is inserted in architecture and urban landscape, so there will be architectural shooting but is fully an urban landscape to portrait photos. Among other things, underexposure "quite obvious" I just find it hard to see it. A more high (even 1 stop) would have resulted burning the sky and the clouds, instead I congratulate Savior who has managed to balance with a single shot at the picture!
Regards, Salvo Non sono d'accordo con quanto dice Hypercri89. La foto è inserita in architettura e paesaggio urbano, quindi non sarà architettonico lo scatto ma è pienamente un paesaggio urbano quello ritratto in foto. Tra l'altro la sottoesposizione "parecchio evidente" faccio proprio fatica a vederla. Un'esposizione più alta (anche di 1 stop) avrebbe comportato bruciare il cielo e parte delle nuvole, invece mi congratulo con Salvatore che è riuscito con uno scatto singolo a bilanciare bene la foto!
sent on November 04, 2013 (23:42) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Thank you both for joining paused to look at my shot but above all for having commented. The group in which is inserted the photo includes both the urban landscape and architectonic then I think I was wrong, because the shot is a city. As for the underexposure, in my opinion it is not excessive. Highlights the coming storm! Greetings to you both, Salvo! Ringrazio entrambi per esservi soffermati a guardare il mio scatto ma soprattutto per averlo commentato. Il gruppo in cui è inserita la foto comprende sia il paesaggio urbano che quello architettonico quindi penso di non aver sbagliato, visto che lo scatto rappresenta una città. Per quanto riguarda la sottoesposizione, a mio parere non è eccessiva. Mette in evidenza la tempesta in arrivo! Saluti a entrambi, Salvo!
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
Resize to fit window
