Abhainn na h-Uamha
by Ecce_Signum

Comment:
A scene with good potential. Seems to be harsh light. I think it's possibly a notch short on sharpness. Almost looks like a 0.3s handheld shot. I apologize if you did, indeed, use a tripod. Just has that slight camera shake look. I see the effort to control detail in the shadows.

Once upon a time, a nice king lived in this palace
by Wessam

Comment:
An interesting architectural study. The perspective would have been corrected with AA's tilt-shift bellows lenses on his box camera. This image has not enough dynamic range, nor dynamic light. In an effort to control the highlights and shadows, the scene seems flat in contrast to me. I love the detail in the sky.

Exmouth
by P-A-U-L

Comment:
Geologically interesting subject. Good detail retained in the shadows. High contrast time of day, but pretty good control of highlights. The sky doesn't seem right, but the cloud detail adds interest. Might be some pp artifacts in the sky. The strength of the image is the detail in the stone and the story it tells.

Cypress
by vawendy

Comment:
Interesting, good sky. Detail is lost in the bright areas on the water. The driftwood stump seems a bit awkwardly placed in the scene. It blocks, rather than complements the view. While I'm sure you wanted to include as much sky as possible, the vertical orientation (with frame added, besides) seems an awkward choice. I do like the good detail in the foreground sand/mud.

saint george and the dragon
by bspurgeon

Comment:
Shooting from inside to the bright outside is a unique take on AA style. The 10 camera stop dynamic range of that situation would have been frustrating to efforts to dodge and burn away in the darkroom. To my eyes, there is good sharpness and detail in the sculpted wood and burlap window treatment. But, the clarity and sharpness fall off in the window panes and frame, indicating a too shallow DOF. I do find detail in the darkest shadows.

Lakeside
by Stagolee

Comment:
I see how you've retained some detail in the darkest shadows. I see elements in the scene which might have been chosen by AA to be the subject of the scene, but, for example, you're too far away from those craggy trees on the point, or in the water just off the point. Those could have been shapes of interest, with the water and hillside supporting the composition. As is, the scene needs a focal point. It's sort of there with the point of land and the far shore. My eyes go there and I find myself wishing to be closer.

Follow the Road
by Ammie

Comment:
The road and fence provide good leading lines into the fine landscape. The shot angle to the sun is acute. The dynamic range of the scene is such that detail will be lost in the shadows, as many objects will go to silhouette. Detail lost in the bright sky also. That high contrast can be effective, as it is with your foreground tree, but might have been anathema to AA. Your tonal range is very wide.

What did you say DP
by Bensted

Comment:
A good bird pose. The sky appears to be one tone. Might have looked more natural with a smooth or natural gradient. I might have composed the scene differently, with bird and stump less center middle. Overall, the light is pretty harsh and coming from directly overhead. Detail is good, but seems stressed by the postprocessing.

Bacchus in the cellar
by wei1108

Comment:
I like this scene. AA did do some architectural photography. Rich tones, nice clarity, superb DOF. My constructive criticism is the absence of perspective correction. AA would use his tilt-shift capability of the large format bellows box camera to square away the vertical lines. I really like your control of detail in shadows.

epic daydreams
by jmritz

Comment:
Mysterious and abstract. Maybe more coarse grain than AA would use. For a subject like this, I also think AA would go for clarity and sharpness. I do like the range of tones, with few blown out highlights and few blocked up shadows.