1987
by joansuzy

Comment:
Too much post processing or JPEG compression artifacting or something. The edges of the slides are very jagged, and the lighting seems overdone. Would have been better if you had less light on the front, and more from the back.

A la Magritte / not a cutout!
by graphicfunk

Comment:
A clever idea, but it just doesn't do anything much for me. Perhaps the whole shot is a little flat, that might be what is making me so wishy-washy about it.

Transparent Building
by NekoNita

Comment:
A neat shot, but in this case the motion blur from the cars is distracting. I'll bump you up a point on a second look, as I didn't actually see the transparency the first go around.

I question the conversion to B&W. It doesn't add anything, and I think the shot may have been better as a color photo.

Windshield
by Olyuzi

Comment:
This whole shot is very confusing. I don't know what I'm looking at, and what there is, is too high in contrast.

She is more transparent than the rest...
by TOY

Comment:
It's a pretty picture, but I don't think that shutter speed type ghosts are really transparency. Too bad you couldn't have known that the shutter speed challenge was coming, this would be a very strong entry there, but it doesn't meet my definition of this challenge.

Objects in Mirror
by robshookphoto

Comment:
Reflection is not transparency.

Invisibly Transparent
by joezl

Comment:
I understand the concept, but this is just too blown out for me to really like it. It looks like the labels are just floating in mid-air. The tranparency is lost, as the bottle really looks invisible.

TranzMe
by kenskid

Comment:
Much too dark. A flash unit (even just a little bit) behind the door with the model would have made this much better. I'm not saying he has to be perfectly lit, but this is too far towards dark.

Time, Interrupted
by Car54

Comment:
Technically very well done, but I don't see transparency, only reflection...

Noice town
by gisli

Comment:
Greetings from the Critique club!

My first impression when I saw this photo: It looks like a post card from the 1950's.

Relation to the challenge: The grain is obvious here and is essential in the "message" of the photo. 100% relevant to the challenge. The grain itself is very well done.

Composition: The photo is very well composed. I like the fence lines, they really draw you into the photo. I'm 50/50 on the foreground, it's stark and empty, which can be good and can be bad. It leaves you to contemplate the mountains here, which I think were the real point of this picture. Finially, I really like how the mountain trails off to the horizon on the right side.

Technique: I don't mind that the highlights in the mountain are blown out, or nearly so, but I do think there's a lack of contrast in them. Maybe if you had brought down the levels a little bit you'd get some definition back in them.

Post processing: No indication of what you did, but whatever it was it was done well. There's nothing too sharp, glowing, or anything else.

Overall Impression: It's well done, but it's not spectacular. It would have gotten a 6 or so from me during the challenge voting. Well done, but needs a little more work to really pull out the emotions. Finally, I agree with the commetner who mentioned the title. //www.dictionary.com is a great free, online dictionary. Anything obviously wrong with the title is going to loose a point in my voting.

I hope this critique was helpful and I would really appreciate a PM from you, letting me know if it was helpful. Also, if you have any suggestions on how to give a better critique I'd appreciate it! :)

Good luck in your future challenges!
---Andrew