OK, strictly it's not a gallery but the "PhotoForum Members' Exhibit Space" <QUOTE>"a non-juried space dedicated to exhibit subscriber's work on a rotating basis"</QUOTE> Well, maybe I have scripts turned off but none of the images here rotate! <QUOTE>"Subject matter is wide ranging and similar to what one would find in a conventional fine art gallery"</QUOTE> Mmmm ... If you say so. Well, maybe Jeff's image would get in, or Deen's without the preposterous copyright notice, or Guys' ... <QUOTE>In the message body it would be considerate to include the gallery's URL.</QUOTE> Oh alright then ... It's to be found at: http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery.html Some definitive comments ... Emily L - "sun and wind" The title says "sun" yet there is an overall blue cast I don't mind the shadows being blue (they probably were) but it would be nice to have some gold in the highlights to offset them. Auto-levels? Seriously, I'm wondering if tweaking removed what was there. As an arrangement - ignoring what I see as an odd colour cast - it's an effective picture. The linear shadows bring out the shape of the wind-blown sand ripples well. Including the base of the fence posts works. It's too uniform to be a great shot though. It needs some sort of object in the sand to act a s a focal point, a small shell, rock, piece of driftwood or whatever. Of course, just throwing one in without giving time for the wind to sculpt the sand round it would not have worked either. Guy - Montreal, Silo 5 in Old Harbour (#2) Guy, this is the digital age: this picture just looks like a relic from a byegone era. It really does. With that apparent "age" comes a sort of warm cozy feel. This is a really beautiful example of the "retro" genre. Why did you present it with a crooked horizon though: the old masters surely would have taken more care ;o) D.L. - Haliaeetus Leucocephalus Google he say: "The Bald Eagle is truly an all-American bird ..." "... the Bald Eagle Protection Act which made it illegal to kill, harass, possess (without a permit), or sell Bald Eagles." OK, in the UK simply photographing some endangered species without a permit is illegal: indeed, many nature photo competitions will not accept shots of such species without proof of legality (a permit). Though not as harmful as shooting with a real (macho) gun, even approaching the birds can disturb them. I'm sure D.L. did no harm. This shot is a good arrangement: two is for sure better than one. For a second I almost wondered if one eagle had been cloned twice ;o) I don't like the plain background at all though: it looks unnatural. Tweaking the levels reveals some interesting effects. Was it really like this? As to the shot, imagine how much better with a natural blue + contrail-free sky. For absolute perfection: imagine the shot with the top eagle turning it's head to the right (back to the picture space) rather than to the left as shown. I tried it in PS and for me it was a much stronger, albeit fake, graphic. Jeff - Mirror Mirror Jeff is arguably one of the gallery's most creative contributors. This image: I guess some will hate it but for me it's a real classic. It's not an image I would have even thought of taking: as shown I wouldn't want it presented any other way (allowing or limitiations of web). As a silver print with real grain I can only guess it woulf be so much better [digital grain just never has the same effect]. Was it taken on film or digtally? The picture. Hair and breasts to the left, a circular mirror and hazy reflection to the right all within an overall "bright sunlight" type atmosphere. For me it all works - it's a really memorable image. Nope, there really is not one aspect I would change. Deen - Deckchair Some things hit you in the face: in this image it's the copyright notice, right across the middle of the frame. Second is the ugly scanner noise pattern on the back wall - yuk. [of course I could have read this wrong and it really is tiled in very small squares] Third is the non-level "horizon" - actually it may not be really level, the film plane is not horizontally parallel to the wall but from then from the angle it appears to be the slope should be the other way. As an image as shown this is yuk. Guessing what the original was like - it could have been very good. The intent appears to be a simple scene with just 3 elements: chair, wall and floor. As presented it does not work: maybe Van Gough signed his images discretely in the image space but few (if any) artists would place writing right across as here ... As to stopping "theft" ... No chance Darryl - Found Objects "Found"? Some interesting junk you have just lying around. A nice arrangement in many ways but marred slightly by the front object being 1) out of focus. 2) eclipsing the sprinkler head by such a tiny amount (more or none preferred) Why a black background? Some rustic wood (decaying barn?) might be more in keeping with the object. W.R. - North Trail A nice picture (but not rising above nice for this viewer). The right-hang tree trunk bisects the picture and frankly just gets in the way. I'm looking at the merest sliver of sky and thinking I would have cropped it out: it adds nothing. Not as good as W.R.'s entry last week. Oh well, that's the lot. While signing off I'm left wondering if everyone is on holiday (the list being quiet and all). A couple of week's back not even Jeff responded to my late review. The sky is blue here today, maybe I should book the afternoon off and take out my camera. B0b
