Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by Abra:
Every time we get a Garden Orb Spider at our place my daughter names it Charlotte. The focus appears to be nicely on the spider but it doesn̢۪t̢۪ quite feel sharp enough. The background is a little distracting though it does bring in a domesticated feel. I do like the leading lines of the web. 6

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by Tiberius:
Poor macro picture. Not a very good angle. 4

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by emoons:
I don't get it...

Oh wait...now I get it.

The idea is good, but it is just a picture of a spider and its web. Nothing jumps out to me and gives me that wow look at that spider. To make it more interesting to me, I would have found a way to get a different background, and I would have tried to get more detail of the spider itself. Now my lenses aren't great, so maybe I wouldn't have been able to do any better myself, but if I could, that is what I would try.

Gave it a 3

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by tvsometime:
The shot is topical but the reflection across the upper section disrupts the visual impression. 5

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by LandzEnca:
The background is distracting, and it seems a bit of a fair distance from the subject, so it could have easily been blurred out by normal lenses.

5

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by Cory:
Another one. No water drops, but it looks a bit more farm like, and she has a meal.

6

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by jayzundel:
It fits (sic) I hate spiders. It won't hurt your score.

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by lunachicken:
A worthy book for this shot, or vise versa. Looks like it even has a tasty snack! 7

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by mariuca:
This shot is definitely less suitable for the radiance of the novel. I do not like to see here the rear end of this creature that seems in search of food instead of weaving a marvel for our amazement.
5 for the effort

Charlotte's Web
by DanaS

Comment by Denielle:
Decent detail. But just a little plain for my liking. Fitting title, however.
Gave it a 3