JDMvW

Possible warning of approaching apocalypse:
I agree with Julie H's comments so far in every respect. That is both in terms of the aesthetics of the photograph and the form of the comments.

oops

Just a little, it reminds me of the FSA photographs of the 30s.
All in all, I think a successful image in its own terms.

Yes and yes, precisely. You understand me very well.

Fred, if the shoe fits, but I would not class your criticism in the "make up a little story" category.
And people wonder why comments here have fallen off --
I would guess I am taking far more risk to dare to criticize the "arty" critiques, than I would be if I said the posted picture is OK, but not outstanding. Tighter cropping might help.

There are many flavors of art criticism. Some try to understand what the artist intended. Others treat the art as a kind of Rorschach blot.

Jes' sayin'

No need to shout or clarify. I said I DIDN'T CARE and I STILL DON'T.
"Profound" is your criterion.

While not quite so enthusiastic, I'm definitely with Anders.
Is it a thumb? Maybe, but not any "nail"
not floating, in shadow.
I, at least, have no idea of what "obvious criticisms" anyone might be making. Nor do I care. The picture works.

Best POW (in my eyes) for a while.
Bravo, Olé, etc.

It is a pretty inoffensive selection, but does it deserve such mocking?
If silliness is a sign of non-native speaking, well.....

I find Leslie's post to be a veritable model for the kind of discussion that would be productive here.
BRAVO

On the contrary, it seems to me to add a character that would not be there with an image with no texture.

The picture may be a little saccharine, but really, after all!

For what it is, it's fine. I'd like it a little better myself without the ghost.

Isn't "Sweid Sideris" sort of made-up *PIE for "shining of the star"? Hmmm.
The texture, not characteristic of most of Sweid's portfolio, is rather like one of Wm. Mortensen's favorite techniques.
The over-all "directed" quality of the pose and costume also reminds me of that person's work.

no big deal, but nearly perfect for what it is.

ibn klp, too ;)

BTW Am I the only one who thinks the subject looks like Liv Tyler? ;)

I don't think I can have much of an opinion about the intent of the (or any, for that matter) artist without a great deal of study of this image and other images by the same creator.

What I can do is to assume, at least for starters, that the image is as the creator intended, rather than assuming that the artist is incompetent. Then, ask what a critic can infer from its form and structure.

The image affects me in a positive way. It has a kind of high-key outer shell and a more muted interior tonal range. The reflections of the sky obscure details in an overall chiaroscuro effect that I, personally, find appealing.

I have seen many paintings of structures with ghostly figures barely visible in windows, so I am reminded of that, too :)

I don't recognize the elf-chosen picture in much of the umbilicospective discussion above.

Understanding what an artist is trying to do is usually a good first step toward appreciation and criticism, as opposed to judging the entire world in some inner light.

sharpness is certainly over-rated, and seems to be a fetish with some people.

Nice image. Put poster edges on it and maybe everybody will be happy, but I don't personally see the need.

This was used by the Smithsonian in displays on looting. Taken with 4x5 Combat Graphic.

homage, in a way, to the Bechers