thomas_durst

Yes, it is an intersting and unusual subject and the composition and the exposure are good but i do not see anything special or artistic about this image. 4/4 for above average.

Without any doubt, very creative. Aestheticly the image is intriguing, almost queer, but it does not engage me. The image's impact is limited to its technical merits of composition and computer manipulation; the image does not bring out any emotion in the viewer. 7 for originality, 4 for aesthetics.

Kodak does claim that Tri-X is a fine grain film when it is not. I feel that the grain of Tri-X has a particular look and feel to it and it a beautiful grain. Also, this appears to me to be a low-light image and in my experience grain becomes more visible with low-light images. I think the scanner has made the grain obtrusively visible; scanners do seem to do this. I'm wondering if the scanner bed was clean; there seems to be streaks that I've encountered before on my scanner bed. I think an actual print would look much better than this digital image. There would most likely be less grain, but the correct amount of grain. (Not every shot can nor should be taken using a view camera with Pan F or TechPan.) The grain and the muddiness of the image and to its mood and its mystery. It would be less of an image without these qualities.

This shot was taken with a medium orange filter. The scan of the

print is a little darker than the actual print.

I viewed both the color and the B&W image, and while the color image is good it lost the mood and the power of the B&W image. Beautiful shot.