This was a humbling experience! I picked what I thought would be an easy photo to duplicate, and couldn't get it nearly as good as John's original! The lighting was impossible to duplicate, and I had to do much more manipulation to get mine anywhere close. I have come away with a great deal more respect for the winners. I don't think I'll be whining again anytime soon!
RAW mode. Several soft focus layers with gaussian blur were used and warming filter applied in PSCS as I didn't have one for the camera (John had used one in his original).
Statistics
Place: 26 out of 106 Avg (all users): 6.4213 Avg (commenters): 7.9091 Avg (participants): 6.1972 Avg (non-participants): 6.5476 Views since voting: 1472 Views during voting: 315 Votes: 197 Comments: 13 Favorites: 0
This critique comes courtesy of the Critique Club :)
It may be a bit hard for me to give you much to work on here, since I considered this one of the top 10 in the challenge (and you were up against some stiff competition!). You definitely gave the image a good amount of soft focus - it's there, but not too much. The colors/tones are beautiful from inside to out, and I can't seem to find any distraction imperfections anywhere on the flower.
True, you shot this at a different angle - not sure if you perhaps lost any points here or not, as I do like the images that provided some sort of variation on the original. The angle is well chosen and the petals of the flower always bring my eye back to the center of the flower (which is certainly good). The only thing this angle does not provide from John's is (like e301 mentioned) the 'landscape' feel to the petals, which provides a slightly more three dimensional feel to it. I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing, as I very much appreciate the excellent composition here.
Great shot, and definitely would've received higher scores had peoples standards not been "ruined" by the high quality of this challenge's entries (votes of 2?? 3...4????).. :shrug: