I'm afraid I have to join the chorus on this one. I don't see Gary Larson in this one. I realize that some people feel that a photo should be judged on merit alone, challege be hanged. However, I do feel that part of the score is the challenge, and that if the challeges were ignored then we would have un-ending free studies. I still would not have voted this image as low as some have. (I figure meeting the challenge or not is worth about 1 point.)
This is an interesting photo, good colors, saturation, and hues. Brightness is fine and contrast is very good. The focus and depth of field is excellent.
The drawback I do see is the sky. Pale and featureless, you've left a blank spot on the canvas. Cropping the sky our would have help a fair amount. Or catching it earlier or later in the day, when there is more color.
Overall a nice picture that should have been voted a bit higher.
Interesting play on irony. This might be similar to the one i chose - that it just doesn't grab people enough as teh typical "far side". I like it and it's a non-obvious and unique selection for the challenge.
This is a great city shot, but to be honest I rated it low. I looked it over for about 30 seconds and I couldnt find a subject that fit with Larson's style. I like how you made the caption Ironic and I think that helps, but its lacking cows, chickens., and dinosaurs if you know what I mean.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
