stefan1

July 23, 2003

The streaks and scratches are very distracting to me. Were they intentionally inserted to generate a certain feel? I like the photo otherwise.

July 23, 2003

Nice expression, but focus a little soft.

July 23, 2003

Not very inspiring to me. The mixed dof does not help to separate out any subject. The grass pointing to the right distracts.

July 23, 2003

Colors and composition are very good. Light falling on the ground in front of her works well.

July 22, 2003

I think this is the most effective photo in this series. Thanks for uploading with sufficient resolution. Possible improvements: more drama with different contrast and shadows (alternative versions of conversion to B/W), remove those wires on the left. A negative version might be interesting.

July 22, 2003

I should clarify that these marking aren't really eyes (or at least I don't think so!). The full frame is attached, it is really the side of this tomato-plant eating thing.

July 22, 2003

This is a very sweet picture but not very original IMHO. I wish she was looking directly at the camera. The soft light works well here.

July 22, 2003

I think this is a very good idea. I don't understand the significance of the folder title, but the image itself works on so many different levels (as was pointed out already), and that alone makes it interesting in my opinion. It looks like the cross is a little crooked and the shadows are not correct, but it is the idea that counts, right? :-)

July 22, 2003

The black background makes me wonder where the person is standing - looks like a drop-off! I think the colors are over-saturated which makes hands and pants lose detail. Maybe a cartoon look is what you were going for... A little too tightly cropped at the bottom.

July 22, 2003

Given the problems in the lower part it might have been tempting to crop differently, but it would have been a shame to lose the flowers...

July 22, 2003

I thought the two eyes were in the same plane (normal to my lens),

but seeing the result I suppose that was not the case. Is that nose-

like enough to make you make some associations?

July 21, 2003

Nice separation of subject and background.

July 21, 2003

Rating your own pictures is pretty dumb.

July 21, 2003

From your series, this is the one where the cross-processing technique was most successful (in my humble opinion). Great colors, reminicent of colorized b/w from the turn of the century.

July 21, 2003

Of this series, I like this composition the best (particularly given the Arthurian title), but it might be a little overexposed and the colors are more interesting in some of the others.

July 18, 2003

Was this taken underwater, or through glass. I'm guessing the latter, but it would be nice to know.

July 18, 2003

You really need to freeze the image if you want to create the effect you're after here. All the different elements in the picture create a messy impression for me.

July 17, 2003

I don't understand the geometry of the top half, but I like it. Too bad the image is rather small. Sound a little dicey to shoot while driving...

July 16, 2003

It does look like the billowing clouds are coming from the top of the building.

July 16, 2003

I like the lighting and the wet hair. It would be more convincing if it seemed like your were really biting down on the fish!

July 16, 2003

Another use of the idea might be to use a full face and just fill in an extra eyebrow under the eye - this is the detail that grabs me here. The symmetry with the forehead at the bottom makes it more of a pure abstract (which is ok too).