One more time

[Woodley Willie]

This was the fourth time I have tried to coax an interesting photograph from this mirrored building.
Again, I did not succeed.  And due to a lack of real skill, I can't say exactly why.  Long exposure, everything was moving, possibly the camera on the tripod as well as the leaves, grass, etc.
I'm not going to give up on this bit of architecture just yet.  Criticisms are welcomed and appreciated.  I have 3 lenses, all D series:  60mm, 35-70mm, and 24mm.

[elsa hoffmann]

Willie, in my opinion the image is flat.
I did a quick and nasty edit - since it is a small file - colours are not great -
and by no means say it IS great - but you can see the difference already
Therefor - editing is an issue
edit - and it is under exposed

[gryphon1911]

What were you trying to accomplish here.

I see 2 issues.

1)  The image seems very soft and flat.  A technical issue that can be corrected.  Could be motion blur, soft, OOF lens?

2)  I'm not finding a lot of interest in the subject, framing/composition.  Perhaps a different angle, getting closer(if possible)...try going back on a different day/time of day when the light is different.

[Woodley Willie]

Thanks Elsa and Andrew.
Elsa, your edit definitely looks perkier.
Andrew, I'm not interested in the image either...what am I trying to accomplish?  I want to create an atmosphere of glitzy emptiness (of the building) contrasted with the natural setting.  Still working out how to do that.

[Woodley Willie]

Well, aside from the mystifying circles floating here and there....this might be my last try for awhile.  Post production was kind of a tie dye affair

[armando_m]

I find the reflective wall between the  buildings really interesting, personally I would try closer details

[brent_e]

i like the last image.   


the mystifying circles are dust bunnies that appear more when the lens is stopped down. 

[Tristin]

My primary critiques are the color and the oof elements of the building. 

On the color, is your monitor calibrated?

On the oof, you can use live view (assuming tripod use) to ensure your focus and aperature selection are adequate.

[Woodley Willie]

Thanks to Armando and Brent (especially for the dust info).
Tristin, my monitor is not calibrated beyond looking at one of the test pages that is available for color.  I've seen a sophisticated calibration gizmo used...even thought of buying one and roaming the streets shouting, 'MONITORS CALIBRATED, MONITORS CALIBRATED....'  Thought I might pay for the calibration device that way?

[Akira]

I would partially agree with Armando.

To me, the problem is more of the concept rather than the technique.

How do you want to present the building?  Its exterior covered with the mirror?  Its shape?  Or its environment?  You may want to think about the balance of the elements you want to blend.

I would think your earlier trials concentrating on the building and its reflection of the clouds and rendered in B&W were more successful, even though they were not satisfactory to you.

[Tristin]

Monitor calibrators are really cheap compared to the lenses and bodies we love and is absolutely crucial for digital post processing.  Until you have you monitor calibrated, there really is no reason to edit color or even luminosity characteristics to a degree.  You aren't making the changes you think you are unless your monitor is calibrated, all you will do is counteract your monitor's already flawed representation of your images and likely antagonize the issues you sought to correct in post processing.  Until you get a calibrator, I would honestly recommend leaving color edits alone.