1. As you will note, I've not entered many of the challenges and know less about the critique aspect. I was not aware that it was customary to post comments about the work in seeking comments from the critique club but would gladly do so in the future. More important, I frankly think that my comments about the work are irrelevant to the critique. It seems to me that one rarely has the thoughts and observations of the creator (I purposefully use this term rather than artist) when judging work. I thought I was seeking responses to the image, not a response based on my goal or vision of the work. There have been many times when I've read critiques which I do believe would be different if the viewer knew of my intent, but in truth that is irrelevent as if you were to see the work posted on-line, in a mag or book or hanging in a gallery you would judge it solely on your reaction - not based on my intent. Having said all that if it is customary in seeking critiques to post some thoughts about my goals or intentions I would be happy to do so in the future.
2. Regarding purpose of this photo - it was a 24 hour challenge so the only purpose was to meet the challenge. The sole objective of the photo was to illustrate a different perspective on the challenge subject - nothing more, nothing less. Frankly it strikes me that is the fun of a 24 hour challenge. Since I cannot pick the challenge subject (and I do not have an unlimited amount of time to ponder such issues) I would not expect the goal to be anything more unless in the rare instance the challenge subject happends to fit within a project I already have in mind or am currently working on. I've only entered one challenge right when I joined the site and have resolved to enter more. My schedule is such that it is difficult to take photos specifically meeting the challenge criteria during the relevant period but I was in the possition to take a quick pic meeting this challenge. As it was a 24 hour challenge I frankly did not have time to do anything of any greater objective than meet the challenge.
3. I had given some thought to submitting a picture which focused solely on the sharp tack emerging from the ice but I respectfully disagree with you on this point. I liked the contrast between the front sharp tac and the soft focus imbedded tacs.
#1 - a photographer who is asking for critique should always include as much information as possible in the photogrpaher's comments block when submitting an image. It's very useful to have your thoughts on the image when I try to offer mine. I can give you more useful feedback if I know your personal objective.
#2 - this photo meets the challenge, but I can't see much in it beyond that. Does the photo have an objective beyond meeting the challenge?
#3 - I can't see any reason for the subject area of this image not to be 'tack' sharp. The soft/out of focus element doesn't add much in my opinion.
Unique concept - could be brighter and cropped or framed broader to show more - and/or wait for more of the ice to melt to have more of the tacks sticking out.
An unusual tack. I love the idea. I very much like the choice of colors and the lighting. The positioning of the yellow tack and the protruding point both seem good. And so does the lighting.I don't quite understand what it is, but someting is bothering me about the photo and it has something to do with visual clutter: the bubble like features on the top surface or the lumps on the side, or just the fact that the subject tack is being upstaged by the yellow one. Can't identify the exact cause, just the effect.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
