Wow! The first "product" shot in the challenge. (And I'm on photo 274--gotta be a first.) Nice light and crisp rendering of the WD-40 can. Think the plane should be more in focus, though.
FABULOUS title! Really unique and witty shot, almost like a Hitchcock where you know there's rust there, but you can't see it, yet the implication is vivid. I think (and hope) this should do well, at least with the US voters -- I don't know if WD40 is an international product.
Composition: Subject Placement, Cropping, Background 8
Technical: Focus, Exposure, Lighting, Processing 7
Appeal: Is it Interesting, Motivating, Etc.? 6
How well does it meet the challenge: 4
Total Averaged Rating 6.25 Dick
I would like to see the plane in focus as it contains the rust which should be the prominant one in this challenge.
Composition: Subject Placement, Cropping, Background 6
Technical: Focus, Exposure, Lighting, Processing 6
Appeal: Is it Interesting, Motivating, Etc. 3
How well does it meet the challenge: 2
Total Averaged Rating(Rounded) 4
Nice shot of can. This needs far more depth of field for the title to be confirmed. I am also curious as to what this would look like at a much faster shutter speed. The spray now looks much like the human eye perceives it. What does it look like on a drop by drop basis? It appears that you have a camera capable of answering that question.
i think the wd-40 can should be blurred and the rusted object in focus. (opposite). otherwise it kinda looks like the wd-40 can is trying to sharpen the image.... poor man's photoshop maybe? =)
I kind of felt that the focas should have been on the rusted part with the can blurry... but maybe it's just me. Still, I liked the idea, and it made me laugh. :)
Aha - there is a way to say rust without chains, locks, or old farm equipment! An extra point for the innovative approach! The blue/yellows pop - composition works too. MAy be stronger with more in focus. Stop way down, use a tripod and try it again.
While it's pretty clear that's a can of WD-40 (not all cultures will know what that is, btw), it isn't really clear what's in the background. It makes for a rather obscure statement taken out of context.