Water Sliding
by Slashx2

Comment:
Image is too small to judge. Not exactly a fashion shot.

I'm so pretty.
by Lorene

Comment:
I'm going to go out on a limb and try to accept that the collar/pendant as the reason why this was submitted to fashion, although it would be better if it were more clearly the subject or central to the shot.

Sun Rise
by maximus69

Comment:
Beautiful sunrise. Not sure what this would have to do with the "most admired style in clothes, cosmetics and accessories." Perhaps underwater somewhere, sporting those designer cement blocks?

Also, the image is too small.

Hot Fashion Plate
by IndigoButterfly

Comment:
Maybe it's the scotch, maybe it's that I just don't understand women and their shoes, but I'm a little confused. A nice shot though.

Curves
by imagesloyola

Comment:
Great pose, great model, great everything--except it'd be better if it were a bit clearer. I feel like I'm seeing double and I'm losing the subject into the background because of the softness.

Sax solo
by burtct

Comment:
That's definitely not a sax. More like a trumpet or flugelhorn.

I wanted to comment on the hands which looked unnatural to me, judging from the halo on left hand's forefinger it looks to be caused by too strong of an unsharp mask?

It's a really nice capture of a soloist however. Good capture of his emotion and concentration.

Campbell's Soup Can (Blue & Purple, Modern)
by m

Comment:

Originally posted by Robby: Have you had a response yet? I'm surprised you didn't ask about posterization. Posterization is generally be modeld as a (non-linear) filter, and posterization is commonly referred to as an effect (when the original comes from a denser color space). It is also a cost savings in printing but not in digital imaging. Is that what you meant by converting between binary representations?

Aye, that's why I brought up internal representations of data. For instance, if I were to save my file as a GIF, I'd have no choice but to reduce the colors down to 255 (or whatever it is) and this would ostensibly be done as part of the conversion process. As has been pointed out repeatedly, the end result doesn't seem to matter so much in the rules as does how it was obtained, particularly in the basic rules.

Originally posted by Robby: Now whether that is legal or not is debatable. I would interpret the rule to be yes, that is illegal as an 'effects filter' - but I do see some ambiguity. Clearly gaussian blur, unsharp mask ('effect filter'), and all jpg conversion filters (generally not considered an effects filter), as well as Neat image (seems like an effect filter to me) are all legal filters in basic challenges. Anyway, keep us posted.

A lot of the rules seem arbitrary, hopefully that's being addressed in the rewrite.

If I ever get a response, I'll definitely post it here. (Alternatively, someone who knows may feel free to just post the response here).

Campbell's Soup Can (Blue & Purple, Modern)
by m

Comment:
Since the final tally doesn't appear to be shown anymore, I calculated the average score.
It appears to have been 3.4899 (691/198). Ignoring the outliers (1 and 10) the arithmetic mean is 3.6936. For what it's worth, when I received the request for the original, the score was exactly 3.4000 and I was quite happy that I'd guessed spot-on. I guess I underestimated slightly voting patterns. I'm wondering if the "vote 1-3, please leave a comment" suggestions caused the abundance of fours. The standard deviation, assuming I plugged in the numbers correctly at 4am, is 1.6882.

I've asked what filter resulted in the DQ, I realize the powers that be are very busy, but I have not received a response yet. The message I sent is posted below:

Originally posted by m: For future reference, what filter caused the disqualification? I believe the only filters I used (unless you consider something that saves/loads/converts the file itself between binary representations, which would seem to be ridiculous, as a filter under these rules) were Gaussian Blur and Unsharp Mask which as I understand it, the rules expressly allow (one sentence before the one that states the rule you reference). I am not challenging the ruling, but wish only to understand the rules so as not to repeat the same mistake. Thank-you.

(Quoted here simply for reference purposes, also of note is that I was mistaken in the message I sent in that I forgot I denoised the image--is this illegal? I seem to recall that it was one of the provided allowed filters.)

Thanks to everybody who left a comment, and it has since been brought to my attention that somebody did do a Warhol tribute (under advanced editing). I decided not to enter a similar photo in that contest because the rules explicitly stated that it was a tribute to a photographer, and I couldn't find any evidence that Warhol was active in that role.

Addressing the comments about lacking blue, the entire top of the can is light blue, and every color has a large blue element. There is also the propensity for green to be considered blue, although I will take the observations into account for future contests.

Enter Romeo
by aerogurl

Comment:
So far this is my favorite image of the challenge. Excellent use of lighting, obviously.

Editted much later to add that I just saw the Love ribbon winners which probably served as inspiration. Still, very nice shot.

Dreamy gaze
by isonaj

Comment:
Sharper focus on the eyes would be better. I wonder if underexposing a little bit more would help, I'm finding myself drawn too much to the candle at the moment. Beautiful image though, and wonderful emotion.