|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 26 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks David! Difficult to compete with you! |
Apr 18th |
| 26 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
I would say 1/3 from the top. |
Apr 8th |
| 26 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
A very interesting mix of landscape, man-made structure, and graffities, which in a way tells a story. I keep looking at the lookout station and I keep seeing the head of an animal, which is good. I find very appealing the contrast between the rock and the construction. I didn't notice at first, but when I read your description, I wanted to see a little more of the ocean, to provide more context to the photo. You have a dirt spot in the sky, one fifth from the right and a little over the rock, just remove it. |
Apr 7th |
| 26 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I like your idea to show resilience, but I don't think that you fully achieved it with your picture. First, I would open up more the tree's root, which are still too dark. Also, you don't need so much of the tree and the somewhat distracting background. I would concentrate on the rocks and the root, showing them at full size. You don't need the rock on the left, either. Contrary to others, I would keep the rocks as they are and cut the tree from the top. |
Apr 7th |
| 26 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I'm biased because of your last month's image, and that's why I don't find this photo so powerful. I think that there are too many elements that don't work well together. There is also too much empty space on the right. Maybe cropping just on the main round element could help concentrate the viewer's eye and avoid unnecessary distractions. |
Apr 7th |
| 26 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I definitely prefer the B&W version, which produces a more intimate portrait. I find everything working well here, from its pose, to the tones, to the catch light in the eyes. Not sure whether having the monkey looking into the camera would have produced a more powerful image, but this is just speculation. |
Apr 7th |
| 26 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
It's incredible how much detail you extracted from the original shot. The original is an automatic "out," but the final version is full of color, texture, and detail. It makes a very compelling abstract, and I don't have anything to suggest in terms of composition or exposure. Just one thought: I'm not so sure about the element on the bottom, around 1/3 from the left; maybe you can clone it out. |
Apr 7th |
5 comments - 2 replies for Group 26
|
5 comments - 2 replies Total
|