tijean

Very nice street portrait.

The florecent green is a bit too much for me. Did you increase the saturation or was the tree really that bright?

I like this much more than the other image based on this scene. This one actually seems to communicate a sense of vastness and loss.

The composition is off balance and leaves the eyes not really knowing where to go. This particular manipulation only adds a cheap feel. All of the technical problems could be easily over looked if it communicated something, but the corny cloning keeps the viewer so off balanced that it impossible to sit back and enjoy the piece as a whole.

Stunning, but the rough, sharp edges (way too much unsharp mask in PS?) really distract from the beauty.

Last time I checked, my name pulled up a bedwetting support group (not me!!!) and a German adult webcam site where I am, apparently, one of the stars. I am also a pretty good soccer player in Europe - or so Google tells me. I'm in the same boat as you - trying to be concerned, but not all that concerned. All of these people are in Europe though, so anything concerned me is pretty easy to pick out.

LOL - yes, mine has not recieved nearly as much attention because it has been up a very short time and, more importantly, I don't suck up. I'm sorry, I usually don't critize how other people rate, but he gives 5s and 6s to the most dreadful junk. Maybe he is just trying to be encouraging. *shrug* Does the fact that his photo gets more attention because of this bother me? No, because it is unconstructive and an waste of time from an educational perspective. Does it mean that it is better? No.

 

As for the question, well, first you have to know that I wouldn't rate mine very highly. Mine would be lucky to recieve a 4 on originality from myself, and that was if I were feeling leaning to the high side. I don't have a problem having my stuff picked apart. That's why I'm here! I would probably end up with a 4/3 or 5/3 on mine, because it is kinda pretty, but not outstanding and a real loser in the originality department.

 

His is nice. 4 instead of 3 on originality thanks to the snow and ice. I wonder why he lists the location as North Carolina. *shrug* Maybe it was the result of a batch upload. I don't like the large depth of field and sharpness of everything, think the colors look flat, and would compose differently, excluding the scruff on the right (or including more of the bush). 4/4, 5/4 I guess. Just so average.

 

And yes, I have a link to a website that lists my name. I was torn on that one, because I have to refer people I know personally and do work for to that site (and a lack of last name would just look shady), but I also direct people there from pnet for the photos. When I get more photos uploaded to pnet, the link is probably coming down.

Ray, I was talking about Jim's constant fishing - telling everyone that every image they post is wonderful in hopes of reciprocation. I mean, if he says that an image posted for it's background and not aestetics is "good" aestetically, that pretty much says that his opinion isn't even based on the actual image. I don't really care about ratings, just the irony. Odd statement, too, about the apartment considering that I don't have an apartment.

 

As for the 'withheld," well, it is easy for people with common last names to post with their full name. I doubt that if I plugged your name into, say, whitepages.com, I would come up with one result listing your home phone and address. That is what would happen if someone was to plug in mine - and I am not comfortable with that. A common name is almost as anonymous as a puedoname on the big ol' web, but my last name practically gives directions to my front door without 2 minutes of searching. The other reason is that when I was signing up, I simply forgot that the full name is displayed and I am not in the habit of giving my full, real, name when signing up for website accounts. It was simply a placeholder, though if I'd known if would be displayed, I would've just put in a * or -

 

Woah. Now that is the evil eye.

Very cold, very dark (which suits it well, IMHO), very good job.

Ray, I understand why you posted this image. To draw people in to read about your experiment. Whether I agree with requesting a critique on an image you don't necessarily want critiqued is another matter. I don't understand why people actually rated it. All of that, though, is rather shrug worthy.

 

But it seems to have served as an unintentional experiment of what happens when a intentionally unaesthetic image is posted. It receives a 5/5 ("good" in the aesthetics department) from Jim!! That is priceless - and - the very definition on mate-rate fishing.

Oooh, I love the mood created with the color and texture. Great job, and unmanipulated, at that!

The toning is a little thick and distracting. IMHO, this would be a better shot in straight b&w or b&w with much more subtle toning.

Beautiful and classic. I especially love the warm tone.

I'm not going to rate, because I'd be too tempted to downrate a pretty good photo because of a really bad frame.

Your eye is naturally drawn straight to the sun. There's no real subject to draw attention. A closer shot (not directly into the sun) may have woked better.

Sean, I have been looking though your work and I have to say: stop cutting off people's feet!! Sorry, just a pet peeve of mine. It was drilled into my head (apparently rather effectively) as a cheapo studio photographer. I like this shot, but would be tempted to do a crop from the top to the elbows. Thanks for sharing your work.

I guess the saturation and color is a matter of taste, because I absolutely hate it. The detail is lost and replaced with too high contrast and way too much unpleasent color. Just one opinion though.

The first thing I saw when I looked at this photo wasn't the crop or the subject - it was the mood. This photo just has so much feeling that even someone like me who is use to picking apart the photos of myself and, to a lesser extent, others forgets to pick it apart.