Row
by Barroness

Comment:
I like the composition, with the emptiness at the bottom of the image. The filter ruins it, though. Protect your art from filters!

When Nature Paints
by nam

Comment:
nice simple study of complementary colors

What the Silence Holds
by markwiley

Comment:
I like how his beard merges into the tree. I like how he towers over smokestacks. I like how he questions me. I like the background blur. there's something a little too crisp and HDR about this though. I don't need to see his every detail.

A Few Days Later
by jomari

Comment:
even if you like how this turned out, this doesn't feel like you. this feels like a computer.

blurred realities
by primabarbara

Comment:
a ghostly convergence into the center. this looks like the consolidation of hundreds of works of art, all overlaid, much of it being lost in the process, like history is lost to archaeologists.

Its Time
by DCrest01

Comment:
I think filter is a big hindrance to the impact of the photo. all the individual elements have a Pier One aesthetic which is not the same as fine arts. That being said, I think the idea of putting a clock on a swing is clever. Some of the earliest clocks were based on a pendulum, and the notion of time which we think of as progressing forward is actually just swinging back and forth. add to that the theme of reeds waving in the wind, and you have a whole meditation on time. I would just say get a more evocative backdrop, filter, and props.

Heaven's Feather, Earth's Shelter
by GolferDDS

Comment:
in some ways this is just a skillful bird capture, but I do see something more to it. Because of the bird's pose and position on a "base" the whole thing looks like a statue, which is a nod to art. I also like the rain capture. Not a lot of drops, just a few, but everything is wet and looks wet. It gives the bird a sense of endurance, stoic in the face of rain, that also adds to the statue narrative.

and it's a bluebird. I like bluebirds.

Fir
by DistantColours

Comment:
questions the artist can ask him/herself: Why is the subject on the side? Why darkness? Why a pinecone? (or is it a fircone?) Is it about the layers? Is it about the seeds?

When you put a subject off to the side, you create an unbalanced composition, which causes the viewer to teeter into your photo. That's great, but now that the viewer is there, in your photo, what does s/he see? I want more. I love darkness, but you are not being fair to darkness. It seems to only be foiling the glowing cone.

think of it this way. you made certain decisions based on standard ways of presenting a good looking photograph. The composition, the lighting, a single subject. You did this all skillfully, but this is a fine arts challenge. Your skills were in service of creating something familiar to the reader. The pleasure comes from familiarity. But fine art stresses unfamiliarity, and challenging the viewer.

That being said, I assume that you acknowledge "fine art" by making it darker than you would normally, and showing a rough texture on the floor. the chiaroscuro lighting does echo some great artists of the past. It's more of an homage to art, than it is art.

Chairs
by Ammie

Comment:
I was your 10. I thought this beautiful and transformative.

Get Me Down
by posthumous

Comment:

Originally posted by tnun: beavers have earwigs?

when pigs fly!