Waves
by sherpet

Comment:
Technically, this is a "triptych" of 3 distinct versions of the same image, not a "merge". It is handsome, and it is good to see you experimenting, but I much prefer the original ojn its own. However, I'd expect that if theis were in a gallery as a large print, many might prefer it to the single-frame shot simply because it so obviously injects an element of "art" into what many might see as "just" a photograph.

My Dad's Toy
by BakerBug

Comment:
Once more, MAJOR DOF issues here. IN photographinng models like this, you usally want more realism, not less. The train is admirably sharp, but the vegetation is so OOF that it is extremely unpleasing to look at. You also have a figure/ground issue at the front of the locomotive, where it is merging right into the shape behind it. Careful attention to lighting can solve this problem.

The Internet
by BakerBug

Comment:
Again, I see DOF issues here. What's intriguing, and even instructive, is that the LEFTmost lamp is sharp and the RIGHTmost cord of the 3 is sharp. This is kind of frustrating visually. The reason it is happening is because the camera is aimed at an angle to the subject, and the plane perpindicular to the lens at that given focusing distance includes both those points.

FYI, in case you did not know it, at any given f/stopo and any given focusing distance you have "x" amount of DOF and it is distributed as follows: 1/3 of x in front of the point-of-focus and 2/3 of x behind the point of focus. In other words, if you have 3 inches of DOF to work with, and you focus at 4 inches, the DOF will run from 3 to 6 inches.

It can be helpful to actually MEASURE the actual physical depth of your subject in a shot like this, and then place an extraneous object 1/3 of the way into that depth, and manually focus on that object, then remove it and make your shots at several different apertures, to choose the one with the most pleasing DOF for your composition.

The Slide Rule
by BakerBug

Comment:
I like what you're doing here, but the expressed diagonal is a weak one to my eyes. The photo has almost as much sense of horizontal division as it does of diagonal division; that is to say, you vae a lot of forgeround out of play and relatively little BG out of play. It also needs more DOF to work, I think; it's frustrating how those precise lines & numbers are not quite there. Makign shots like this, I do a LOT of variations both of positioning and DOF in order to find the most pleasign combination.

Fire
by Neil

Comment:
In general I love this kind of stuff, but this particular example is too "linear" to please me. I might accept the vertical linearality of it, but the diagonal banding is fighting that and I don't find the result all that pleasing.

Sheer Alps
by Neil

Comment:
This is a hard one for me to call. It's a very powerful composition, but I feel that the the rendering of the tonal values is not all it could be; I feel as if there's a sense of luminosity that's not quite breaking through. If I were working on it, I's be double-contrast-masking the darker zones, first with screen mode and then a second pass with soft light or hard light mode. This will bring contrast into the darker zones without blocking up the darkest parts so badly.

Evening Stride 2
by Neil

Comment:
Overall this pleases me, but I'd use selective color to get a hint of hue in the white sun-disk, and Id carefully clone out the bush that's interfering with the lead runner's foot.

Looking Back at Fall (Impressionistic/Painterly)
by Neil

Comment:
Neal, this shot feels tilted to me. The railing posts on both sides are leaning right. It looks like you've leveled the imaginary "horizon" at the expense of the foreground verticals. I'd try squaring up the verticals if it were mine. In any case, as a transition it seems more "manmade to natural" than "fall to winter" to me.

new fragrance. "BLOOD"
by goc

Comment:
Hah, that's interesting. I gave this one a 7, myself. I note the commenter you reference actually gave a 1 "for crudity", followed by "originality" and then denying that blood is a fragrance (which would amuse anyone who ever worked in an emergency room cuz it has a copper metallic fragrance that is quite distinctive), so I suspect she meant "lack of originality" as the language is a bit fractured. Anyway, I liked it so there ya go!

R.

Daffodils
by Refocused

Comment:
I was checking out your profile following up on the milestone thread, and realized this was your image. I believe this is a surprisingly low score; I had this image ranked in my top 10 and had given it an 8. I think it's quite lovely, and I admire the unabashed way you celebrate the common textures of the Background and foreground cloths.

Oddly enough I put some daffodils in "Something New", and they did pretty well. But of course mine are in the field, not a still life.

Congrats on your milestone!