>What's the point in dividing the photographs into >"absolute crap", relative crap" and "the rest"??? Good question. >"gems", "jewels" and "simply good shots" ? Ditto <<<Looking at pictures I have quite specific feelings that grow out from the moment and some previous moments, the overall mood of the day, and only then from my health, education and preceding experiences.>>> That goes for everyone. In the world there are billions of photographs and on line I probably encounter hundreds per day. Most I don't "see". One of the biggest things a photo must have is to be eye-catching: you are walking by a gallery, see it from the corner of your eye and go back for a proper look. That's a snap decision. There may be lots of better pictures in the gallery window but when they are competing in a world where we are bombarded with images ... Those in the PF gallery get a head start. 500 (???) people may actually look at them all every week regardless. The "first impression" comment is not without merit - in fact it's critical. Of course, there are exceptions: especially from photographers who already have a reputation. Some photos without instant impact do grow on me: likewise some wane very quickly. ATEOTD though any feedback is better than none ;o) Bob
