endof_days

A lovely moment well captured. I can feel the joy.

I don't rate other peoples work so you kinda lost me with that one. Just so as to be clear, you don't like my photo and my mommy doesn't like me ? Oh my, now you've hurt my feelings.

I like the image of the women in the window light. Not sure about the second exposure with the coffee mug. I don't see it adding anything to the image.

Nicely composed street scene. I wish the women in the foreground had not noticed you and your camera. The colours are way over the top and spoil the shot for me.

I wish that the background was softer and the flower sharper but overall a lovely shot.

That rock also has an affect on my viewing. I don't want to look at it but it keeps tugging my eye to the corner.

The crop is too wide to work as a portrait, which is what this image wants to be. The background is too amorphous to give any meaningful context. As a background for a tighter portrait the soft oof background would be well suited. In this crop there is simply too much of it and the monkeys get lost in the background.

Nicely done, masterful control of light and depth of field.

Everything about this photo that works, and there is plenty that does work, is diminished by the treatment of the ball. It ends up looking like it is from another photo or another galaxy. What the photo does not need is a new crop.

My eye is pulled to the tangle of the dogs legs with the mans, which is the only interesting aspect of the photo. After 5 seconds of sorting that out I am bored and want to look away.

The most interesting part of the photo imo is the center area and as such I think that the square aspect ratio brings down the composition. The glass panels and street outside on either side of the photo do not add much to the image ( perhaps they reinforce context a bit) but they do add busyness and distraction to an already busy frame. The seated figure looking forward at the rear of the row of tables and the two people walking beyond pull me into the center of the image and somehow add mystery and drama. The black silhouette "selfie" aspect seems too obvious to be interesting. Again a tighter crop and portrait ratio could make this aspect less blatant. I like the B&W conversion the tones are handled nicely.

I love the background, although the birds do spoil it somewhat.

are you not confusing lower light intensity with softness? I do not believe that I am. The remainder of the image is certainly lit differently than the areas brushed with light. There is also a difference in sharpness, perhaps not a dramatic difference but the tree branches do appear sharper. With the current level of jpeg sharpening on the file, as it appears here, the tree feels over sharpened and I prefer the look of the foreground. Of course one has to be reticent to hold too much stock in the degree of sharpness of a small web image.

If it were me, I would never have centered the tree and if I weren't me and did center the tree, I would have composed the shot portrait rather than landscape orientation. The horizontal composition leaves too little room above the tree and too much vineyard at the sides of the frame to take full advantage of the flow of the receding lines of the rows of vines. I applaud the spirit of experimentation but the result leaves me cold.

For those who are mystified by how this was done, you need only read Peter's explanation on the photo's page. Given that the tree was light painted during a long exposure, it stands to reason that it would be sharper than the remainder of the image. The light painting would have effectively given a shorter exposure with more light and no doubt slight motion in the tripod would account for the softness in the rest of the image.

The pose feels awkward. Why is her shoulder jutting out of the water so prominently? The composition likewise feels off, the models placement in the frame does not work for me. I like that the background has discernible, yet not clearly identifiable, objects and the shadow across her face adds drama and interest. I also find the B&W conversion well suited to the scene. The presented attempts to "fix" the image rob it of what little character it had. The model , the lighting and the scene itself, seem to my mind to have presented an opportunity to come up with a far more successful result. The image is okay but somewhat disappointing.

The cliche white sphere needs to be larger. The cliche silhouetted tree needs to be shorter. Then the cliche birds would sit lower in the frame and a more cliche aspect ratio would be achieved.

While I agree with Fred in as much as shooting a portrait from below can work, in this case I agree with Tony that it doesn't work here and just comes across as unflattering. I also agree that the arm and hand look awkward. I suppose that the thumb in the mouth is in some way intended to justify the bizarre arm position. All of this brings me back to my original point which was that everything about this image seems to be about positioning the tattoo and not much else.