Interesting comments here. Guess I look at things
differently than most of the list. My ratings:
Artistic/emotional appeal. 3,1,2
Technical ability. 2,2,3
In long, technically the first picture is a total wash out.
Artistically your picture, Dave, is just another pretty
camera club shot. It would look nice on a calendar, or on
the wall of my shrinks office but it is boring. The bikes
are an interesting combination of stark jagged shadows and
ordinary every day street. The dog makes you ask what is
happening here, but as I said it stinks technically and
should have been disqualified because of that.
This is why I seldom do critiques but there were so many
comments here that it rattled my chain <grin>.
--Tom
"David A. Mann" wrote:
>
> Peter Alling writes:
>
> > The third place photo while technically very good is a bit to cluttered.
> > (Are the photo credits correct did the same photographer submit both 1st
> > and 3rd? Hard to believe...)
>
> He actually won last month as well with a shot I thought was pretty good (but
> still outdone by at least one of the runners-up IMO). I can't show it to you
> because they don't seem to be archiving the results.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
