Four Norwegian moods

[Björn Carlén]

Being aware of all the expertise present on this site, and me being a hobbyist, makes me hesitant to post anything under the critique label.
But what the heck - what have I to lose anyway?
Here's my first contribution. I'm curious as to what you think about it.

[Jakov Minić]

Björn, don't you worry about posting images at all.
May this first contribution be the first in many to follow

As to what do I think:
The image itself with all the lines of the rooftops could be a good background. I am just missing the subject. A bird, a plane, a superman...

[Björn Carlén]

So, the geometry, texture and color of the scene itself is not subject enough?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Sometimes, sometimes not. I guess there is a certain resemblance to music and music performance here. Form on its own might suffer if content is not compelling to keep the attention of the audience.

Fortunately, here as elsewhere there is no magic formula or wizardry to guarantee success.

[simsurace]

I find the upper part interesting for its texture. The lower is a bit distracting to me. The shot would have more tension if part of the upper roof would be hidden behind the lower one, so if you moved a little bit forward and down. This would then result in a square image. Things hiding behind other things: that's sometimes more interesting than being able to see the full structure.

I don't get the connotation with the title, if there is any. 

[Björn Carlén]

I see what you mean by distraction, simsurance. The lowest roof is a bit disturbing in a clumsy way.
The upper roofs are already partly covered, though, so I don't  quite get what you mean by that remark of yours. 
Well, well, an image should stand on its own without explanations, I think, so I say to myself better luck with mynext attempt.
The caption is a travesty on a composition by Stravinsky. In this case it refers to where the image was shot, as well as the four walls in display, whith each their different look; structure and color.

[armando_m]

I see a pattern of white lines divided by the roof edges / gutters , which in my opinion is subject enough for the shot,
the right wall in beige breaks the pattern I may have omitted/avoided that part

[simsurace]

I see what you mean by distraction, simsurance. The lowest roof is a bit disturbing in a clumsy way.
The upper roofs are already partly covered, though, so I don't  quite get what you mean by that remark of yours. 
Well, well, an image should stand on its own without explanations, I think, so I say to myself better luck with mynext attempt.
The caption is a travesty on a composition by Stravinsky. In this case it refers to where the image was shot, as well as the four walls in display, whith each their different look; structure and color.

I meant something along those lines, hiding the roof of the white part behind the closest roof:

[Björn Carlén]

Simsurance, that's a nice pattern you've got there. It would emphasize the closest roof too much in this case, though. That part has no direct light, and has this ugly gutter attached to it. Nice graphics, though!

[Andrea B.]

I like the abstraction made from the geometries, so I was wondering if bringing a bit more light into the details and textures might be interesting?
This, of course, may not at all be what you had in mind for this foto. "-)

[Gary]

B&W (spepia) w/ a very hard contrast ... all to emphisis and enhance the abstraction quality.

[Björn Carlén]

... I was wondering if bringing a bit more light into the details and textures might be interesting?
This, of course, may not at all be what you had in mind for this foto. "-)

Thanks for your suggestions! I like that the image is brighter in your version. It corresponds better to the sunny weather at the time of the capture. I find the microcontrast a bit aggressive, though. The colors in addition have become a little to saturated for my taste. The shadow in the foreground is lifted to an extent where it looks unnatural, at least on my display. But I like the brightness, as said before. Thank you for taking your time!

[smusesuse]

I really like Andrea's edit. I liked the picture before too but imho it was somehow missing something. I like the texture of the walls much better in Andrea's version, also the sky. And I just love the funky colour bits that appear on the lower tiles!

[pluton]

Andrea's version is more lively as viewed on my 13" laptop screen.  The mid-tone contrast, while increased, has not crossed into the 'exaggerated zone'....at least on my 13".  Viewing on a different display might change things.  That's the downfall of everyone owning their own displays: The author has no control of what the piece looks like.

[Björn Carlén]

I tried a B&W conversion as suggested by Gary, and I think it works surprisingly well. Thought I needed the colors here, but no.
Thanks, Gary! I chose not to tone it sepia, though.
Any thoughts? May be too dark still.