Is this the best PF members can do? http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery.html You decide! <IMO> Jeff Spirer Nice photo. Nit picking little detail though: that little distraction coming into the picture 1/3 way up right hand edge. Still a nice picture though: suspect it's much better than it would have been without the subject blur. Apart from that little distraction it really has a lot to hold the old interest. Certainly my favourite of the week. Trevor Cunningham Does an image have a focal length? Thought that was the property of a lens? Anyway: it's the oldest question in the book. The reflection of the minaret is further from you than the minaret is. Probably It's an entertaining photo nevertheless. WRGill Strip Mall? Looks like a pier to me. Nice photo whoever you are WR. Good use of foreground and background Mid ground is empty but I don't mind that much. Jimmy Harris Lighting not too hot: looks a bit flat. Graphically well composed but how much more powerful if the little girl had been riding towards the camera in the same position. As it is I'm left to ponder what that fluorescent green thing is on the woman's bum.... Chris Strevens "This hill is close to London and close to where I live and we travel to this beauty spot to sit in the car, walk on the hill and have tea and cakes. My 91 year old mum loves to go and watch the clouds drift by and the wind rustle the trees. We both have pneumonia at present but hopefully we will both recover. " OK - now I know why you like the picture. Maris V. Lidaka, Sr Who was it showed a Ferris wheel a few months back - Greg? Not the same one is it? Dunno what to make of it. Very regular pattern. Is it a straight reflection ? <G>. There's lots of patterns but nothing else. It's fine, just not grabbing me. Per Ofverbeck Nicely composed and taken. Bet there are lots of photos of this in Danish camera clubs: bit like the British Museum here. If it were mine I would clone some floorboards over the grey triangle bottom right: it seems to break the intended patterns. Not having seen this library before it makes interesting viewing: a tribute to modern architecture. Pity about that ruddy sign: bet the architect didn't plan that to be there. Dan Mitchell A clean graphic picture: pretty well presented. It needed to be taken from 300mm to the left to give just a tiny sliver of wood between the window frame and the shrub. Maybe it was taken straight on to keep the verticals vertical and parallels parallel: with PS it's easy to "correct" that later anyway. Achal Pashine Weird effects. Fails for me because you didn't have her attention: her strong gaze is for someone else (the press pack?) There is an almost imperceptible flash-ghost in the background - once noticed I don't like it. The white line on the right: maybe it's a false vertical but I still want it to be vertical if it's in the frame. This could so nearly have been a great portrait but for those few tiny details. Pini Vollach Lacks the depth of field it needs: I suspect a wide angle lens (24mm ?) at maximum aperture. The building in the background is well positioned but lacks sharpness. The lens appears (to me anyhap) to have some barrel distortion: another odd feature is the apparent *diverging verticals* as if the film plane was tilted down slightly. I'll forgive the small amount of apparent tilt: with those converging verticals it's difficult to tell exactly what should be up. I get the feeling this was composed to have the right hand column as a false upright. What it needs is a couple sat on the seat - as that is where it is in best focus. Jim Davis Nice bird portrait - it is. Good highlight in eye. Beak looks sharp. Background nicely bokehn Beyond that though I have to agree with your "Not much more to say, really" Peeter Vissak Can't see a highlight in the snake's eye I'm afraid. <G> This is a very interesting shot/story as opposed to a great photo. It's a perfectly good photo: it's not a work of art that's all. I certainly like it: it's sharp and well lit ... love the detail of all the side-lit mud on the wheel </IMO>
