"I'm Sorry... It won't happen again" (Propaganda of an abusive spouse.)
by FactoryX

Comment:
Wow. Believeable and powerful. Some technical notes: I would guess you were going for dark tones, but I think a bit more contrast would have helped. Also, I think the light falloff towards the left is a bit too delineated and sudden. If it were mine, I am not sure whether I would have cropped it or tried for a more gradual drop off. Overall: Superb!

That's the Way the Cookie Crumbles
by DiamondPete

Comment:
Very imaginative, and a good literalistic interpretation of the phrase. Photographically, this isn't clear for some reason. Also, the white part of the cookie is overexposed. If your camera or software support's histograms, that's a good way to watch for these things. Look for an exposure where the histogram approaches but does not quite reach the right exposure limit.

Supplementary information exchanged via email in response to the authors query (put here with the picture for the benefit of others):

----------------------------------------------------------

It' s hard for me to tell why your photo doesnt look clear from the small
photo, but here's some theories:

1) It may be noise. Long exposures on most digital cameras result in a
noisy image, much like using high ISO values. Or if you were set to a high
ISO value, or used automatic exposure where the camera can vary the ISO
value for greater sensitivity, that would introduce noise.

2) It may be oversharpened. That cause contrast halos to appear, which can
actually make a photo less clear. Especially one with a lot of detail or
some noise to begin with.

3) It could be the result of JPEG artifacts, from using too high a
compression ratio (or as the setting often goes, too low a quality setting).
I can't tell because its small; I see something that looks like a block
effect on the table, but it also could be a texture or pattern.

No, I don't think the overexposed regions is why it's unclear, but the long
exposure could have something to do with it if the floor, room, or tripod
vibrated at all, even ever so slightly. For example, if its on a tripod, on
a wood or plywood based floor, and someone trodded by, there could by a
slight vibration which could cause lack of clarity.

As far as the histogram article, my G2 makes it really easy to spot
overexposed areas when using the histogram function. You see there are
overexposed areas in the thumbnail, and it goes a step further and flashes
the overexposed regions in the thumbnail. I don't know if your S20 supports
that. My son has an A60, and it doesn't have this function.

Here's an article online that might be some help.

//www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml

I also recommend Scott Kelby's series, The Photoshop Book for Digital
Photographers, and the equivalent one for Elements (which is what I have.)

Still Pampus
by Cathy

Comment:
FROM THE CRITIQUE CLUB:

You've found a great subject. Now ask yourself, what's special about these, and how can I show their uniquely interesting properties, or make the artistic statement I am searching for.

To me, the white puffs work great where you have blue sky. They look soft, almost (perhaps stretching it to make a point) cloud like. If you could have found a direction to show a few of these against the sky, following good composition rules, you would be half way there.

Then there's exposure. That's definitely trickier with this white subject in bright sunlight. You have to watch for overexposure. In this shot, you have overexposed areas, which a histogram on your camera would have showed you, if the Optio S4 has one. If not, it's a great idea to bracket your exposures, once you have composed. Taken one 1 stop, or 1/2 stop lower, and 1 stop, or 1/2 stop higher, as well as the one your meter finds. Some cameras, like mine, have a bracketing function, where you set the range, and it will take three exposures when you press the shutter.

It's small enough I can't really judge focus here. But even if your exposure was right, you could have easily used a lower shutter speed and a higher F stop here to give you more DOF. 1/60 or 1/125 would have frozen any slight movement of the plants in the wind, and the higher F-stop would give you greater DOF.

This subject would make a great shot I believe, and would be good practice experience if the above is new to you. So what are you waiting for... ;-)

I hope this is helpful!!!!

"You can't put all your eggs in one basket."
by lwkimages

Comment:
A very good still life capture of the this literalism.

Sticky Subject
by tfaust

Comment:
Interesting perspective. I wasn't sure if I would use the term sticky or thorny (or spikes) for a cactus so I looked for it on the web, and LOL, there is a store called "Sticky Situation" who is a grower of succulents. As a photo, I would prefer to see a more interesting composition other than the centered one here. But the perspective is interesting!

In The Red
by dsidwell

Comment:
A well done and interesting photo; I am not as convinced it makes a good literalisnm, but I do like the shot!

Blood is Thicker Then Water
by Firstrich1

Comment:
Good literalism. I think the hot spot in the background really detracts here, as well as a couple other smaller factors. I don't think the centered composition is very dramatic here, as is the subject. Also, I wonder what the object is above, there's a little there, so it attracts my attention, but not enough to really see what it is. I think this might have worked well just as a close up of the separated liquids, focusing on the lighting and colors to give it some snap!

One Red Cent
by fdpiech

Comment:
Good literalistic capture. Photo is good, but I think I would have preferred it with more DOF.

Tighten Your Belt
by sher

Comment:
Interesting capture and tones.

A guiding light through life's stormy seas
by Drake

Comment:
Pretty shot, and a good literalistic interpretation. My subjective suggestion would be to crop a little on the right, so the focal point, the light house and that wonderful big wave, were not so centric here.