fisherman.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by SandyP:
This is beautiful! I wonder where it is????? It's calling me to go visit there some day :)

Pedersen-Wedding-1-234.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by Jutilda:
Darling. Love their bright faces. Nice lighting and skins. Congratulations to the happy couple. (are they in front of a garage?)

Urban-Blues.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by Germaine:
Well-named.

Jewel.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by Germaine:
Love the color and the bokeh, but I'm not sure about that white reflection. In jumps out at me. Could you try a very "thin" fill layer to make it not so obvious?

Anticipation.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by kombizz:
nice lighting

Goddess.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by kombizz:
nice natural curve with fuzziness!

Nude-Photo-Shoot-June-06-08.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by kombizz:
nice curve without that light spot

Crawl.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by Jutilda:
Cool pose. I like how the light hits. Makes you study the shot.

Goddess.jpg
by Troutbear

Comment by Jutilda:
Beautiful lighting and sublety but I think it's too blurred. I'd like to see more focus or perhaps a narrow DOF.

CAUTION: Time Passes...Bye!
by Troutbear

Comment by mandyturner:
*Critique Club*

This image does have motion blur, but it is very confusing to look at. It seems like the boat and the blurred pole are both fighting for the main subject. Your motion blur is on an object that normally would not be moving. I guess YOU were moving? I think what makes motion blur pictures interesting is that you can visualize the movement in your mind from a still image. It would have made more sense if the BOAT had a motion blur because in reality, it IS a moving object. Poles don't run around on piers. Or if the background was blurry and your camera focused on the fast moving boat. I hope this wasn't rude and you find it helpful.

mandy