audidudi

I agree ... for my taste, it needs ever-so-slightly less on the left and oh-so-slightly more on the bottom and possibly the right.

 

I love the color pallette -- I don't know if they're technically complementary with one another but to my eye, the color background is a perfect match for the colors of the subject -- and also the motion blur.

 

I've tried several times to create images such as this one and every time, I've failed dismally. Nicely done!

The first thing my eye settled on (after the tree, of course) was the dark patch in the upper lefthand corner. As a view camera user, I'm always careful to look for this before I fire the shutter and while in this case it may simply have been the clouds doing their thing, I do find it distracting. I also agree that the image would benefit from having a bit more ground visible. Still, there's a lot to like here...

I agree with Vance ... this one is difficult to comment upon. Although I hate to focus attention on basic technical issues that may well be beyond Peter's control, the banding on the right side detracts considerably from his image. I would definitely clean up the left edge, too, what with the sliver of black tapering along the side. (One thing I find helpful with images such as this one is to add a 1-pixel black border. This more clearly defines the image and makes it stand out better from photo.net's white background.)

I think the subject matter is wonderful and while I can't say that I'm a big fan of silhouettes, I suspect it was exactly the right choice for this subject. Compositionally, I probably would have chosen to go with a square format -- with Peter's permission, I've cropped it as such below -- but barring that, I'd like to have seen just a smidgen more room left on the right side. To my eye, it just looks a bit too crowded as it is.

Although I once made a living offering critiques in another field, I'm afraid that I don't have much experience critiquing photographs. In fact, that's one of the reasons I signed-on for this experiment so please bear with me until I get up to speed with this...

While I like the basic idea here, my eye ends up getting bogged down in the black hole on the left. I also think there's more sky and grass than is necessary and this obscures the center of interest, which to my eye is the tree on the right.

Accordingly, if this were my photograph, I'd crop it in a more panoramic format as well as tweak the levels and curves slightly to create a darker, somewhat more mysterious mood that's a better match with the wisps of fog. Since Carl indicated in the Atget forum that he doesn't have a problem with his images being tinkered with for discussion purposes, I did a quickie job on it in Photoshop and came up with image below...

Although I might be tempted to add back a bit more grass and crop away a bit more of the trees, this version, IMO, makes its statement a bit more concisely and effectively.

Given the history behind how the GT40 came to be built, its inclusion at a Ferrari event strikes me as being quite ironic...

It's very nice as is but cropping it square -- my favorite format -- might improve it a bit.

Just like Mary Poppins, it's practically perfect in every way ... except for the soft foreground, that is.

Close but not quite ... the left side strikes me as being a bit pinched and it's tilted off level enough to be distracting. There is certainly a lot of potential here, though...

Yep, this one works well for me...

Those Autocords sure are something, aren't they?

Admittedly, I have a bias toward square images but I think this one might look a bit better with some of each side cropped off.

Not the most original of images -- how could it be? -- but it's certainly a great one! Nice job!

Although I'm generally a fan of color, I prefer this image over the color version...

I assume the lighting was intended to mimic the patina found on a bronze scultpure -- I'll give the photographer credit for an interesting idea -- but other than that, I find very little of merit here. Original, perhaps, but definitely not to my taste...

Love the light but it looks like the horizon isn't level. I know it could have been the waves and/or the angle of your shot but I find it just a little distracting. Otherwise, nice job!

Although I'm biased towards square-format images, I think this one would have worked better if shot that way. To my eye, there's just too much width and the centered sun is a bit distracting. It's still a great shot, though, my nitpicking comments notwithstanding...

I find the shadow on the left side of the frame a bit distracting and think that cropping it out is an option worth considering...

IMO, using digital imaging technology as a means of working around the technical limitations of film-based photography doesn't make the resulting image any less of a "photograph." Likewise, using digital imaging technology as a more expedient or exacting way of accomplishing something that could have been achieved using conventional methods doesn't automatically make the resulting image any less a photograph, either, as some people would have you believe.

It's only when digital imaging technology is used to create something that never was or never could be that I believe the connection with photography is severed.

That's not to say the resulting product isn't art or that it isn't good art but merely that, IMO, it's no longer photography. Just as a painting becomes a mixed-media piece when the artist attaches pieces of wood to the canvas, photographs become digital art, for lack of a better term, when the original image is manipulated beyond reality or in ways that can't be duplicated using traditional photographic techniques.

In this case, because the image in question could have been created using conventional methods (but only with considerable time and effort), it falls within my definition of photography. That I don't particularly care for it -- there are other images in Maurice's portfolio that I like much better -- is neither here nor there when it comes to determining whether it should be properly classified as a "photograph" or "digital art."

I don't know ... there's something missing from this otherwise excellent composition. Maybe you could find a piece of wood nearby and lay it across the seat? ;^)

Not only does he have "the eye" but he's modest, too, having rated his own photo lower than I did! ;^)

This one comes oh-so-close but ultimately, I would prefer it with just the chair alone...

I prefer this version to the color one. Again, nice job!

I find the bright bit at the very top distracting and think cropping a little tighter would improve the composition. I like the color and subject as they are, though ... nice job!

Earlier this year, after 20 years in this state, I saw my first Rattlesnake as well and in almost the same area. Unlike you, however, I made backing up my first priority and didn't get a photo of it...

I love the perspective but it's a shame about the sky...