The invasion of the flying saucers
by Windtale

Comment:
Attack of the ceiling lamps!! The sky was their ceiling... and Earth was their carpet!!

The Unseen Forest Dweller
by PeterPic

Comment:
Campy but lyrical. It reminds me of a movie like Starman that might seem quaint to somebody today but is actually more heartfelt than most of what's in theaters now.

I like how he's amazed at himself. He is the poet transformed by his observation. Is he coming to be or is he disappearing?

Lost in Space
by elizadeb

Comment:
You have completely captured the level of sophistication of the original TV series.

Cryogenics
by Agaeris

Comment:
spooky real. I feel like Ted Williams' executor.

Invasion of the Plastoids - Part 2: The Woody Interrogations
by Art Roflmao

Comment:
This is perfectly legal as long as it's being done offshore. At least take them out on a boat.

Soylent Green
by Fromac

Comment:
He looks like he knows the secret of Soylent Green and to him that just makes it taste better. I never realized before how much people's arms look like celery. I'm definitely going to be more careful in the produce department from now on.

courtney rae, don't kiss the day away
by FellSevenLeaves

Comment:
interesting shot. kind of operatic. I look forward to seeing more of your work.

The traveller
by purpleflutterby13

Comment:
lovely!

learning to crawl
by Skip

Comment:
wow. very cool shot. I love the incorporation (and deconstruction) of text. this would have been a top pick if I had voted.

X Marks the Spot
by jwillie44

Comment:
Greetings from Critique Club!

Ok, I guess I should start out by trying to explain your low score. I see two main reasons for this, which are generally known as "meeting the challenge" and "technicals."

meeting the challenge
This was a very controversial challenge, poorly explained and poorly understood. I think there were two main voting blocks. The first were people who thought negative space was simply empty space, perhaps with a texture or OOF background. The second group was closer to the Wikipedia definition. They were looking for shapes created in the negative space. Your image did not appeal to either group. You thought of negative space conceptually. This turned out to be a very Out Of the Box approach, whether or not you intended it that way. To put it another way, the negative space isn't in your photo, it's on the floor of the room you're taking a photo of. I enjoyed this approach and gave you a 6, but I am not a typical voter. :)

technicals
The DPC crowd often likes to misuse the word "technicals" in phrases such as "this photo has good technicals." They think it is possible for a photograph to be "technically good" much like an Ikea entertainment center, with all the slots and grooves in exactly the right place. Most often, "technically good" means that lots of details can be seen, even in dark areas and highlights, and that the subject of the photo is in very sharp focus. They also like to see a full tonal range, with the darkest areas being close to pure black and the lightest areas being close to pure white. There is no reason in the world why these things would make a photograph "good" but they are easy things to look for so people do. Your photo has a sort of muddy look, not crisp at all. Dark and light areas have no detail. The subject is not sharply focused.

the point is...
You described what you saw in your comments. Your photo conveys what you saw (for example your detail-free dark and light zones contribute to this "lost feeling," and so does the soft focus). Therefore, your photo is a success. What you saw is meaningful, i.e. the feeling of being lost. Therefore, your photo is meaningful. In other words, a "good photo." I'd be more interested to see your next photo than DrAchoo's next photo, for instance, or Larus's. They sometimes surprise me with a good photo, but as I said, it's a surprise.