> I might have read your > words differently, if you hadn't been shouting (that > is, using capital letters) when you wrote that the > pic, without the eyes, was nothing. You say shouting: I say EMPHASIS. Heck, I'd use HTML with <EM> or <B> or <UL> but the first time I do that I get Greg on my back!. Actually - it makes the same sense to me both ways: without those eyes it would have been one of the dullest, most boring pictures the gallery had ever seen. But the eyes were there: they transformed it; they single-handedly transformed a piece of total crap into something memorable. They enable the general rule (of not having an out of focus subject dominant in the frame) to lose meaning. When you want to know what I say about images I don't like you would only have had to have read as far as Greg's for "Sorry greg: this one is a flop". I'm more interested about your need to jump to defend your images (and your eye) so readily. If you had read on, placing the comment in context, way "With them is strangely becomes compelling." But even if I had been slamming your pic: so what? You still got the best end of the deal. You got some of my time for nothing: if you ignore it you have lost nothing. I don't pretend that I could not have written it better given more time: the time I give is for free though. Also, for me any rework/rephrase almost inevitably loses spontenaity - I'm just trying to get down intitial impressions. Your image was, I still maintain, a challenging one for a review. It would be easy to detail things I shouldn't like - indeed if I simply described your image factually in words it would sound even worse. What is challenging (and eternally memorable) is to say in words WHY it worked not flopped. > Email is a clumsy medium. It is if you read it wearing size 12 boots !! ;o) Bob "A picture of two men. A man playing a trombolone fills the foreground: he is grossly out of focus, the top of his head is out of the frame. A microphone juts clumsily into the frame from the right: also out of focus and with almost no compositional harmony with the scene. Under the trombolonist's armpit shown very small the the frame another man, centrally placed, stares towards the musician."
