I know the technique is overused, as is the phrase 'overused', but I managed to lay hands on a petidish and dropper in the lab at the last minute, and it was too tempting!
Resized, sharpened, added border.
Statistics
Place: 4 out of 152 Avg (all users): 6.6667 Avg (commenters): 7.2308 Avg (participants): 6.3333 Avg (non-participants): 6.7869 Views since voting: 2896 Views during voting: 372 Votes: 249 Comments: 18 Favorites: 1 (view)
The technique here is well executed. However I will say to you (as I did on another image in this challenge) that I personally don't like how this image is a blatant rip off of a previous Transparency Challenge's ribbon winning image. I'm all for seeing a cool shot on DPC and then going and trying to recreate the image yourself to see if you can do it. I've done that plenty of times. It's a great way to try and improve your own shooting by attempting to duplicate a cool shot that inspired you here on DPC. To be fair, this concept has been done many times here on DPC. But the fact that this idea was a ribbon winning entry for a previous Transparency Challenge tells me that you just took what worked before and emulated it hoping to score well too and that strikes a bad cord with me.
Please don't take this as some kind of personal attack. It is not. It's just how I feel. Despite my personal feelings, I still scored this image above average.
This is a common technique, but you did it well and I appreciate the work involved in doing this well after my only aborted attempt to do this with water. Did you use glycerine, which I think is supposed to be better to work with? It may have been better with the real paper more out of focus.
Yeah, this is where the challenge got confusing for me. The focus is on the transparent thing, not on the subject beyond it. This is a great shot either way, but I feel the need to ding for challenge.
Very similar to the previous winning entries. The exposure is good. The only nit is that the DOF is not shallow enough as the OOF letters are distracting.