No Bordersby
phinbobComment by EarlBaker: This comment is in response to your forum question.
I gave you a "4". When I first look at an image I ask (1) Did it meet the challenge? and (2) is it a good photo? A "decent" photo that meets the challenge is a "5" in my book. If the photo isn't even "decent" or if, in my view, it doesn't really meet the challenge, then I'll drop to a "4".
If the photo is better than decent in technical execution or in creativity, then it goes up from "5". A "good" or "plus" photo that meets the challenge is a six. Great photos go up from there. On the downside, I'll give a "3" to a really bad picture that is attempting to meet the challenge. Lower votes ("2" and "1") go to bad photos that I think are really making no effort at all and which seem, to me, to not be serious entries.
Your picture, to me, was a decent but uninspiring photo of an airplane sitting on the ground. Pretty static, and a little boring. A lot of blue sky and brown concrete. Harsh sunlight. So, to me, if it clearly met the challenge, I probably would have gone to a "5". But the "No Borders" caption was not, to me, a "well-known, often-heard phrase, proverb, cliché or saying." So I did not think that the photo met the challenge very well, which is why I moved down to a "4".
How does a picture of this plane go from "4" to "10"? How about a well-composed action photo of the plane landing in a third world country, with sick children waiting for the doctors to arrive? Or a shot of the doctors exiting the plane to tend to the waiting victims? A night shot of the plane in dramatic lighting would bump you up a couple of points. That's the type of thing that brings the photo to life.
I hope these comments help. I'm new here myself and I have learned an awful lot about my own photography in just a few weeks.
Photographer found comment helpful.