Stop!

I like the simplicity of this one. It hits well the theme. Exposure seems fine, but I would like to have a sharper version. Seems the lower left corner is a little blurry.

 

calin

Hit the brake! I was going to do this but you're just too quick off the mark for me PT.

 

Love the pattern, frame a bit much, themefit great, could be sharper (as Calin has said), lighting good, very pleasing overall. Wish it was mine!

 

Cheers

 

Darrell

Very well done indeed. Me to I think the frame is a bit too much (or a bit too plain - a narrow red line within the frame might also be good).

 

Theme fit is very goad. An this one nicely avoids the problem I tend to have with repetitive patterns: it's nice and dynamic (and that contrasts well with the title). Good composition, love the simplicity, great job.

 

Tom

Same here. Nice image, frame is a bit thick. I would burn the top right corner to darken it to match the other 3 corners and create a balance. Just a thought... Nice image.

I'm with the guys on this one Pt..... the frame is too much. Dave's suggestion to burn the top right corner is a good one but I think once the frame is gone I might go the other way and lighten the other corners a tad. Ah lighten.. darken... we're never happy:) An interesting idea PT. Great texture. Well done.

 

sally

Oh dear, web frame comments...zzzzzzzz. As to the image :

 

I would call this "passionate cubism" because the tones are sexy and speak to me of passion, the lines of reason : the combination as a meeting of heart and intellect. Important that the one lighter (viewed as orange) square breaks a potentially humdrum lighting scenario - it is like a welcome flame kindled in one's darkest hour; here providing visual contrast.

 

Excellent composition, love the angle, would re-shoot and have it all relatively sharp. Probably my favourite in this folder thus far.

If the frame takes away from the image, I think it is worth mentioning. Like any other piece of art the frame must be neutral to the image and help seperate it from the background.

 

While it shouldn't be a main concern when looking at an image it must not make itself a main concern either. If it does, like it does here IMO, I think it should be brought up.

 

Somebody wake Seven up. He probably hit REM with this post... :-)

"...probably hit REM with this post..."

Not sure what Dave means here but I have to agree with him that if a frame is part of the image it is fair game for comments. I think this is a great pic but the framing does spoil the overall feel a little. Nuff said from me!

Cheers

Darrell

Dave and Darrell - how many of the posts here refer to the "f" thing; do they remain constructive, or become so much gum-chewing yada yada after a while.

 

Within PT it is one way of trying to disguise authorship. I doubt this PT uses the same style of 'f-ing' in personal portfolio.

 

Learn to see past - it's not like it was caught on film or by a sensor, and highly unlikely it will be printed as you see it displayed on this web page.

 

Yawn, returning to Nod.

To butt in....... why include the frame if it "adds" nothing to the image? Quite frankly I don't buy the camouflage clause. Dark glasses would be more effective.

 

Regardless of the forum, critiques are subject to what the photographer chooses to show us....no matter how mind numbing. Quite simply this image is better than the manner in which it is presented. My thoughts.

 

Sally