Well, I got off work a bit early today, so I can take this opportunity to do my "homework" before the hockey game comes on the tube. Branford Marsalis is blasting on the stereo, I've got a cigarette all lit up (no lectures please - I like it, okay?), and I'm all set to go. This month, it's my pleasure to comment on images by Chernicoff, R.K., Whitlock and Irlanda. In no particular order: "The Pollenator" by David Chernicoff >From your accompanying comments, David, my guess is that the original 8x10 is much sharper than the PUG image. That's ashamed, because my first reaction was that this an image that demands sharpness. I do like the tight depth of field, the blurred leaves in the forground, and the even blurrier background. To me, it's ashamed that the stamen (is that what they are?) are in front of the bee. I can't really make out the bee's eyes, so I just don't get the feeling that the bee is "staring" at me. At this resolution, I think the shot would have been much better without them in the way, as I find them distracting, although I do understand that you probably had only a few seconds to take the shot. I think that (other than the stamen) the overall composition is just about perfect; I like that the bee is horizontally, but not vertically centred. I think it gives us more of an idea of what the bee is up to - although I can't really explain why. It would be nice if the colours were a bit more vibrant, but again, my guess is that they are on the original 8x10, and they just didn't come out in the scan. I'm sorry that I couldn't be more positive, David, but I do have to be honest. I think that overall it's a very good shot, but there are some things (as mentioned) that just don't come through in the PUG image. I think, if anything, the fact that this shot has so much going for it, so much potential, that I've been harsher on it than I might otherwise be. "Cycas" by R.K. I love this shot! It truly is one of my favourites from this months Gallery. Was it available for last month's? It would have been terrific for "patterns and textures", imho. The detail is wonderful, right down to the "fur" on the leaves. The pattern of the vertical stems, the diagonal leaves and the curls at the end of the leaves is entrancing, hypnotic. The composition is almost perfect - it gives the shot an abstract quality that I really enjoy. The curls on the left, being slightly out of focus, really "snaps in" the rest of the image. And, the black background brings out the vibrant green of the plant. You obviously took great care in the composition, including DOF of this one, and it shows. Once again, one of my favourites this month, thank you! "Autumn Spheroids" by Rodger Whitlock What I liked: The detail of the concrete background, including the brownish/yellowish discolourations. The long shadows cast by (what I'm guessing is) the sun. The glint of the fill-flash on the balls - I think gives them some sort of "life" (I'm struggling for words here). The detail and smoothness captured on the balls that are in the field of focus contrasts nicely with the lack of detail of those that aren't - I like that effect. What I didn't like: I wish the balls around the edges weren't cut off. I find that rather distracting, although I'm sure that was purposeful on your part. Maybe you were going for the "randomness" of the pattern - or lack thereof. The lack of pattern of the balls. Mind you, once again, maybe that's what you were going for. Overall: This one didn't do much for me on the first few viewings. But I must admit, the more I look at it, the more I see. It may be that what I perceive as randomness and chaos is exactly what you were trying to capture. At the risk of sounding somewhat academic (which I sure as hell am not!), this is reminding me of studying the British Empiricist, David Hume in philosophy, so many years ago at university. I recall that he said something to the effect that the universe has no patterns; it is the human mind that attempts to put what it perceives into patterns. Maybe that's why I found this image so disquieting when I first viewed it. Maybe, making me think about these things is why this image has considerable merit, after all. Sorry to waffle so. This is an image that NEEDS repeated viewings to work through. Bottom line: I liked it. "The Jewel" by Gianfranco Irlanda I think this is my absolute favourite from this month, Gianfranco. Everything, but everything works, right down to the title! Read the title, look at the image, and I'm trying to figure out what kind of "jewel" it could be. I don't recognize it as anything that I'm familiar with, but the patterns, the beautiful deep blue of the jewel, the black background, the lines radiating from the centre of the large "jewel", the gold around the "jewels" (looking like a gold setting of some sort), are all absolutely entrancing. Those radiating lines give it a jewel-like quality, but the viewer realizes that this must be something else, but what? Then when I read your description, to realize that this is bubbles in a cup of coffee. Well, that just set me off! You have managed to capture a moment here. You have taken something that most of us see everyday (well, maybe not with those colours!) and ignore, and captured it in a way that is truly incredible. You obviously have an incredible eye, to have seen and captured this from something so mundane and commonplace as a cup of coffee. This is one great photgraph, that my critique really doesn't give justice to. Thank you for sharing it with us. regards, frank - 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 .
