portraits ***

to the community. . .Call me an amateur (well, I am actually), so I may not have the same critical eye as the pros, but I think this has got to be one of the best of the photos in its class of studio portraiture. Why then isn't the average rating much higher folks?

to Andrei. . .I've joined photo.net to learn how to be better since I've recently picked up the camera again; don't get many constructive comments on the photos that I submit for critique; so unless I quit my day job and neglect my kids to enroll in a photo school, my journey to improving via photo.net may be a long one indeed. . .my first thought (after WOW) when seeing this photo was that I'd like to get to this level of excellence one day. . .

so may I learn something by getting YOUR feedback on this photo. . .

what do YOU think would make this a photo.net 7/7?

am I just being naive. . .is it because she's not nude?

ok, ok. . .I know the audience is probably male dominated (but i really DON'T

know that for sure). . .but she IS VERY beautiful. . .enough to get folks to really LOOK at the photo. . .NO?

why not 7/7?

Asa Frye , May 11, 2006

Thanks for comment. Unfortunately I can?t tell you the same, because my English is too bad and I?m also a community. Concerning the rating: at photo.net (and similar) photos are estimated by all interested persons, not only by experts in field of photo. Estimations are exposed by only subjective criteria. It is impossible to estimate objectively the subjective criteria, you know :) But there are also allelically determined preferences in choosing of objects for contemplation besides subjective and objective criteria. And it is impossible to wrestle with it. Is it necessary :) I wish good luck and successes in reclaiming photography.