My latest rejects. The first I had posted a link to a couple pages back, but decided to delete that post and instead include it here with the comments. I guess the thing about abstracts is that they're not for everyone, and must not be what the gallery is looking for. (
my comments in bold)
What's the point?
It's pleasant capture that ticks just about all the boxes for technical excellence and creative framing. The curves complement the image. The only issue with the image is that the subject matter itself has no 'wow' factor expected from that of an 'exclusive' image.
Nice study of shape line and form. Great sharpness on the marble (?).
Screen in the BG a bit of a distraction.
i said yes but think a portrait crop would have been better.
My comments in response are: what's the point of any photo other than to convey an image, whether capturing an actual scene, or looking at the interplay of lines and shapes. But like I said, abstracts aren't for eveybody. I can see the point about the screen, but I looked at it as adding a little texture to an otherwise empty background.
Now this next shot's where judges' comments I feel are contradictory and/or getting confused with other images or are making assumptions that shouldn't be made when judging. Unless an image is resubmitted, shouldn't it be judged on its own merits and not be compared to others?
Very nice B&W photo!
Good sharp image. Nice B&W processing. Technically sound photo. Being a matter of 'exclusivity' is a more difficult issue to resolve - what the image lacks is the interest to have the viewer captivated by the content. It's a striking rendition with good perspective and use of DoF, but does not seem to invoke intrigue and meaning as hoped.
Nice detail of the original image.
Huh? What original image, this is the original image!
Needs more DoF
What about the good perspective and use of DoF just mentioned?
Original image had a stronger composition.
Again, what original image and why is this photo being compared to a different image and not judged on its own merits/flaws. These two images are different enough to realize that this isn't just a crop of the first abstract I entered. Also, wouldn't a "technically sound photo...a striking rendition with good perspective" by definition include good or "strong" composition?
Interesting!
Looks familiar
Yes Vote!
I have other abstracts, but why bother? If all the technical boxes are filled already, it's obvious that the judges aren't looking for this type of photo for the gallery.