glenn_polin

I want to say something about "negative shapes" where the light is shining through, but actually all the shapes are positive. Seriously, it is a fine picture and provides ample material for serious thought, if only I could stop looking at the shapes! Nice job.

The overall impression of the image is very pleasant...the shadow lines running horizonal across the vertical picture on the bottom. I wish we could clarify and simplify the top some though. Make an opening in the trees, or somehow simplify the tangle of branches.

Beautiful, geometric and fanciful.

If his left arm was more visible and part of the photo, it would be improved. Otherwise, a great pleasure to view.

These sorts of buildings are an aesthetic challenge; the wood is interesting, the colors are interesting, the surroundings...what to focus on. IMHO, there is too much included in here. I'd like a closer focus on less.

The Best!

I like the innovative composition!

Really a fine shot; although I might change the gray sliver at top right, it doesn't bother me. The little bit of blue jean does spoil the mood; it takes a transcendental photo and makes it ordinary.

The boat is beautiful; consider getting rid of the distracting background elements and really turning it into something extraordinary.

I like the expression and the moment very much; but the bike handlebar intrudes into the foreground. Why not remove it, or crop in closer on the boy?

I would sharpen and crop the photo to bring attention better to the subject; the moment is great, its just a question of how best to focus people's attention on it.

Jeoren:

 

I was mostly relating to Thirulmale's comment; I read what he was saying as that extensive post processing was either wrong or unacceptable. It is a tired debate, but if we can't do post processing here, I am definitely in the wrong place. I just think it is ridiculous to speak of post processing as if it were something radical; every photographer with a darkroom (which I had in the early 70s) has engaged in post processing in search of the most prints most expressive of his or her vision. That is all Anna or I or anyone experienced in PS is doing.

 

Now go critique/pick on my "Autumn Sunflower"; I value your opinion.

Apparently, extensive post processing and digital photography is a bad thing, by your tone and comment. I guess we should all just shoot film and do no post processing, no dodging, no burning, no tricks with masks...oh, right, all of those things are OK if they are done in a "real" darkroom, but they are verboten if they are done in Photoshop?

 

I think I'll go elsewhere if that is the attitude here, because it is too absurd for me to pretend to go along with. Do I have to hide because I think post processing enhances an image, and I don't shoot film?

 

Anna's work is beautiful, and whether you call it photography or not, it will command viewing because it is striking. The above image is a "nice" picture of two handles, complete with shadow. I wouldn't give it a second look if it wasn't here in the circle.

 

I have a great deal to learn from conventional photographers skilled in the use of analog cameras and films. I hope to learn that somewhere as I go on in life. I would like to think that all of you, especially Jeroen and Thirumale, have something to learn from Anna P. I know I do.

I feel like the original really gives the impression of murkiness and a cave. Perhaps the scanner is at fault. There are some nice colors to work with but somehow the rocks in the light seem overexposed and much of the rest seems murky. It wants sharpening and some more detail in the rocks.

Sign me up for the next free swim; are there any details about what we are looking at?

I'd like to see more intensity in the image. You might achieve that a number of different ways in PS as well as at the moment of conception. Perhaps this would be more dramatic in B&W, or some subtle work on emphasizing texture would make it more compelling. Or more saturation; the color looks underserved here; it is there, but not powerful.

 

Jeroen, take a look at:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1112434

 

Is her subject inherently more interesting than yours? I don't think so, but visually it is stunning and compelling.

 

The metal handles here look overexposed, without texture.

A rating of Excellent requires a comment: Ok, this is an excellent photo, the best I have seen today and in many days. The use of available light, the capturing of the moment, the precision and the clarity: just wonderful. Oh, the composition is wonderful too.

Uninteresting visually

Very pleasing

A rose without color is hard for me to love.

Nicely composed and colored.

It was hard to find a reason to look at it more than a few seconds. If people don't know what it is, will they spend time with it?

 

On returning back to it now, it is obvious it is a bottle and cap and more pleasing.

Piotr asked me to take a second look at the title of the image and possibly modify an earlier comment I had made, or at least understand the photo better. I have done so. I often don't read or care about the titles (actually, in the "critique" mode, I don't think we see the titles), so I misunderstood the photo.

 

Having said that, I have two things to say:

 

(1) I still think the photo is unappealing; particularly the coat and skirt still bother me. The flat white of the coat is annoying and the dark black of the boots and purse seem like a black hole.

 

(2) The photo seems well below the rest of the artist's work. Piotr, you really have some beautiful work on display here, but I can't see this photo as being on the same high level.

 

One man's opinion.

The background and the foreground just don't go together somehow; both are interesting and striking, however.

Beautiful and subtle.