Up Close and Personal
by hdebar

Comment:
blurry - all detail lost. Needs a tripod!

Family Tree
by RockBruise

Comment:
maybe try shooting over or through the fence!

...
by nephoto

Comment:
if you had stooped a little lower, the reflection in the water may have included more of the interesting mountain. Nice image.

Venice
by Matthew

Comment:

Originally posted by Beetle: Wonderful shot, I'm glad you were ready with your camera. I just gave it a little tweak in PS - got rid of the haze and made it look even better !!

Thanks - tweaked it myself and reloaded.

Loud in the crowd!
by usia

Comment:
Hello from the Critique Club

This is an interesting image, telling a story. I am not quite sure what story (is the guy on the left about to hit the man with the loudhailer, or are they walking together chanting etc?), but I am sure there is one!

You appear to have used text book technique on DoF to get the shallow DoF - wide aperture and zoom. The lighting levels have required you to use high ISO and slow shutter, giving a motion blur as well as shallow DoF. I am not sure that the combination of blurring techniques works well here: one commenter (and I am sure he reflects the thoughts of others) thought that this was PS'ed, and on first look that was my impression. Because there is more than one blur technique at work, the blurring looks uneven. With the knowledge of the settings, I can now see why, but voters (who are missing these details) would not. Even knowing why, I find the uneven blurring uncomfortable on the eye, and it is the image, not the technique, that is being judged.

I sense a slight lack of focus on the subject's face: the focus appears to be on his hand. This may be a consequence of some motion blur or of the shallow DoF, but does not draw me in. Also, his face is in shadow (makes me realise how important the face is in any image), which, although impractical to avoid, makes for a less interesting focal point.

Given that this is a night scene, you have some colour issues to resolve from the raw data, and I think that this has only partially been achieved. The reds and skin tones look a little muted.

Overall, an interesting image, but the interest does not overcome the two or three distractions for me.

Good luck in the next challenge!

Bug off!
by LevT

Comment:
Hello from the Critique Club!

I like this image, which fits the challenge reasonably well. The winning shots were much more obviously "crowd" shots, which may have been an influence on voting.

DoF picks out the subject well, and I particularly like the foreground blurring visible on the left - it really defines the focal point.

Subject lighting (as other commenters have evidenced) is difficult to judge: it is not traditional, and the face has the appearance of being dodged in (even if not). It has a yellow cast, which on the one hand helps delineate your subject from the rest of the shot, but on the other is unnatural.

Nice image. Good luck with the next challenge!

ODD: adj. unusual or unexpected; strange
by manic35

Comment:
Archeologists have found that in the absence of knowledge as to what Flamingoes eat, rusty nails were fed to flamingoes at Tower of London in its zoo in medieval times...

The Artist
by annah

Comment:
Hello from the Critique Club!

This is a very bold and striking image. The strong reds and blues are well represented, and the balance between the three images works well: the composition of the middle image places the paint a little lower than the blues in the outside images, creating a pleasing "smiley" curve to the blue dynamic. Your decision to tie the images together using colour and theme works well. The images are sharp and well defined.

By way of criticism, there is something a little odd in the reds, particularly noticeable in the middle image. There is a slight vignetting to the two outside images, which is pleasing to my eye, but there appears to be an issue with blown out reds at the top of the middle frame: it resolves down to a single colour, whereas your other images retain some texture and detail throughout.

The framing of the triptych is fine, and the narrowing of the central pane does not bother me, but I am not so sure about the frames around each of the panes: the frames look a little fringed in places and very slightly uneven. I wonder if this is a result of creating the image, including the frames, at full resolution then resizing - that might explain it. If so, at this resolution, one tends to get a cleaner effect by resizing the images then adding the frame at the lower resolution.

These are minor criticisms of a great image - congrats on 44th, and good luck with the next challenge!

Fantasia
by Matthew

Comment:

Originally posted by alexsaberi: very nice image, except the horrid low res areas around the rifles! Plus very noisy looking to me.

Agreed - I will have to scan the original properly, as this is not a good copy from the original b&w film shot. This was the low res scan that I received when the film was processed. I will try and scan a better copy when I have a moment.

Luminous Eye
by jaam

Comment:
Excellent GTG picture - nicely composed (Jean has a similarly composed shot that I really like).