I would recommend avoiding replacing the sky with a scene that clearly has different lighting angles. Your buildings here were shot sometime during the day without clouds, so there are distinct shadows being thrown from larger buildings onto smaller ones. But the sky shows a sunset after the sun has gone below the horizon, or at least with the sun behind clouds. While the editing is seamless, the effect is flawed. Also, I'm not sure the scale of the two is quite right: the clouds are just a little too large in the frame for the wide angle lens used on the cityscape. I would expect that lens to make the big, billowy clouds much smaller in the composition. If you intent was to practice your sky replacement editing, you nailed the technical aspects.
thank you Phillip for the feedback. yes this was just an experiment albeit wrong angles /scale etc. BUT i had 2 things in mind
a. given the buildings were lit up on a cloudless background i wanted to add some texture to make the foreground pop
b. was hoping it can warp some minds in order for the viewer to look 2x as something looks out of place but not sure what ..
(i do however have this internal dilemma with sky replacements. but being on the move all the time visiting some cities/locations for 48h or less most of the time the skies are flat. The big question now is if one uses your own "skies" or purchase "skies" is it wrong to enhance the main image ? i assume there is no right or wrong but would be like to know what the pro's say)
I would recommend avoiding replacing the sky with a scene that clearly has different lighting angles. Your buildings here were shot sometime during the day without clouds, so there are distinct shadows being thrown from larger buildings onto smaller ones. But the sky shows a sunset after the sun has gone below the horizon, or at least with the sun behind clouds. While the editing is seamless, the effect is flawed. Also, I'm not sure the scale of the two is quite right: the clouds are just a little too large in the frame for the wide angle lens used on the cityscape. I would expect that lens to make the big, billowy clouds much smaller in the composition. If you intent was to practice your sky replacement editing, you nailed the technical aspects.
thank you Phillip for the feedback. yes this was just an experiment albeit wrong angles /scale etc. BUT i had 2 things in mind
a. given the buildings were lit up on a cloudless background i wanted to add some texture to make the foreground pop
b. was hoping it can warp some minds in order for the viewer to look 2x as something looks out of place but not sure what ..
(i do however have this internal dilemma with sky replacements. but being on the move all the time visiting some cities/locations for 48h or less most of the time the skies are flat. The big question now is if one uses your own "skies" or purchase "skies" is it wrong to enhance the main image ? i assume there is no right or wrong but would be like to know what the pro's say)
I personally like it.
Thank you Paul