Butterfly 9

This really bears your trademark, as it has an astonishingly beautiful image with vivid colours and great finishing.

With best regards,

Alpo

There is the explanation of my rating. First, the photo show a dissambled - reassembled dried butterfly by someone who don't know anything about butterfly. The wing are reassembled on the wrong side. We are seeing the upper side of the wings while we are supposed to see the underside. This kind of butterfly (as well as most of butterfly) will never rest on a such support.

This photo is not pleasing to see...

Sorry to say that but you asked for critiques and this photo shocked me.

Jonathan Sylvestre and Friends,

One thing I would like to inform you is that I never mentioned any where that my butterfly or bird images are nature photographs. You cannot compare Pictorial photos to nature or vice versa. I make Pictorial images not nature photographs.

There is also a difference between a pictorial image and nature photo. One can make changes in a pictorial. By using Ps or manually we can make mohlarized, black light and infrared images or during printing we can dodge, burn, montage, tone separation, solarize etc .

You have the right to rate my pictures as you feel. However I just wanted to explain that my pictures are pictorial rather than nature, therefore I expect them to be judged accordingly.

Saleem,

You are right. I considered this photo like a nature photo which is not. Im not sure how to appreciate pictorial photos but I'll change my rating with the idea that is not a nature photo.

Hi Saleem

Another digital alteration. I saw your reply interms of "pictorial". This is neither pictorial, a macro or a nature photograph. It is plain and simple a DIGITAL ALTERATION. The way you present your photos mislead new inexperienced photographers in believing that it is possible to take a picture like this. There are a lot of mistakes on this photo as presented. It also creates a falls image of your abilities. This is difinately two pictures that were put together on a software program. It can even be three pictures in one. As I said previously, I believe in honest photography. I also like digital alterations as long as it is presented that way. I also see Photo net as more that just presenting your photos for comments, but also as a place where we can learn from one another. Miss presentation by the more experienced photograhers confuse beginners. Put it in as a digital alteration and even I would like it. As presented - a very low marking from me.

Rust

Saleem, people are being so harsh because you have not mentioned anywhere that is not real. It's not in the description, and under "manipulated" it doesn't say "yes." If you are up front about it I think you have almost all positive comments, because strictly as an image it's very nice. if we are left to believe that it might be an authentic nature photograph then I can understand the negative comments.

Saying "PS 5 is used" is not nearly enough. Everyone uses Photoshop. The problem you've created here is now you have people leaving comments like "nice capture" when it's not a capture at all.