What's wrong with this picture?

[Shacklebolt]

This was shot as a 12.3mp FINE jpeg, so there's a limited amount of stuff you can do to it, but I've sold a full-sized print of it. I'd just like some criticism, and criticism that keeps in mind that this picture has already been sold as is, so "this picture sucks" type stuff will be of precious little use to me. But I do value the opinion of folks on here.

w/Nikon D300
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8
f: 2.8
Focal Length: 130mm
ISO: 800
Shutter: 1/100

(Auditorium, no flash permitted, had to work with the light provided)

[hobbbz]

The man's cutoff head bothers me and the woman's dress blends too easily with the overall orange tone of the image.

[synth3tik]

I agree with the cut off head. Also the color is off. I like the tone of the girls skin, but the wood floor is too red and blends in with her dress too much. I think a little color correction/white balance would really help out.

[jwt]

X2 on white balance/color shift. The man's arm is too orange, as is his clothing.

[Shacklebolt]

The man is Asian, so his skin is not going to lend itself to orangeness under that lighting, and secondly, if the picture is orange, it's because the lighting at that point was orange.

How does one correct for white balance in photo editing?

[Digital Skunk]

The man is Asian, so his skin is not going to lend itself to orangeness under that lighting, and secondly, if the picture is orange, it's because the lighting at that point was orange.

How does one correct for white balance in photo editing?

The color for both the man and woman is off, but that has been said to death. Compositionally the photo leaves me wanting more information and emotion. Just by looking at it no one can really tell what is going on other than some theatrical performance, but which one, and what is going on?

A lower angle to get rid of the stage is the first choice, a wider angle since I would assume that the female isn't the center of focus for the entire play (either way I wouldn't know since it's not portrayed in the photos) is second, and even though there is no flash photography the aperture could have been set higher to get greater depth of field and sharper focus.

To change the WB in post you will need to work either the curves, hue/saturation/levels if you are editing a JPG. Or a combination of those three tools if you truly understand the minute differences and similarities about them.

Composition, Composition, Composition is the second most important part of photography, the first is your EYE/Imagination. The fifth is the camera body and glass.

p.s. You had a D300, why didn't you go to a higher ISO and stop up your shutter speed and DOF?

[Shacklebolt]

The person who is buying the photograph is the girl herself. She knows what the photo is about, so I'm not concerned about he composition so much as the color of it.
Ah, and the photo is already cropped a fair amount. The photo was shot from a good 60-80 feet away. I didn't think I would have gotten the same quality of a cropped photo at an ISO of, say, 1600.

By stop up to you mean, e.g. at 3.2? It was shot at 2.8 - the widest the aperture could be.

[Digital Skunk]

The person who is buying the photograph is the girl herself. She knows what the photo is about, so I'm not concerned about he composition so much as the color of it.

Not to sound harsh, but it's something that should come to mind every time you hit the shutter. Not all of your future clients will think the way she does. The color isn't the most distracting element in the photo, the two random bodies standing off to the side are.

[Shacklebolt]

I think you miss the point - believe me, composition springs to my mind every time. As it is though, she is satisfied with the composition as is. I am fortunate in this regard as, indeed, the body to the side is distracting. So I have shifted my focus away from that and toward the color.

[Digital Skunk]

I think you miss the point - believe me, composition springs to my mind every time. As it is though, she is satisfied with the composition as is. I am fortunate in this regard as, indeed, the body to the side is distracting. So I have shifted my focus away from that and toward the color.

Oh, okay... sorry about that. :)

[Doylem]

[QUOTE=Shacklebolt;5289661]This was shot as a 12.3mp FINE jpeg, so there's a limited amount of stuff you can do to it, but I've sold a full-sized print of it. I'd just like some criticism, and criticism that keeps in mind that this picture has already been sold as is, so "this picture sucks" type stuff will be of precious little use to me. But I do value the opinion of folks on here.[QUOTE]

You want criticism... but only within your own parameters... :rolleyes:

You've sold the picture to the one person who might want it...

Well, that's a result, isn't it?

If you genuinely want C & C, you let people say what they want.

[Shacklebolt]

I do want criticism - but I'm not opposed to being in a critical dialogue. For example, people say the white balance is off, and that I should work on the color saturation. That helps, and that's what I'm doing.

I'd just like people to get the whole side of the story. For example, I agree with Skunk that the composition isn't very good, but I'm trying to provide an explanation, not an excuse. I also think he misunderstood (or I probably didn't explain well enough) that I meant, how can I fix this photo as it is. And not, info to make better pictures in the future. That info is of course helpful, but I meant, photo editing-wise.

[compuwar]

I meant, how can I fix this photo as it is. And not, info to make better pictures in the future. That info is of course helpful, but I meant, photo editing-wise.

That wasn't apparent. The first thing I'd do (and I don't think the dress merging with the background is horrible- it depends on where you want the eye to focus) is I'd re-tone the white garment to some darker color. Your eye is immediately drawn to the lighter areas, and there's not anything "interesting" there to see. I'd start by toning it dark grey or black and see what that does to the overall dynamic.

[Lovesong]

Alright- as everyone has said, your color is off, but more specifically, it's too warm. There are some blown highlights, and there is a green cast on the man's shoulder and the girl's arm. . If you were to look at a histogram, you'd be able to tell that the image is flat, and thus needs more contrast, and, obviously, to be sharpened.

In you place, I'd start off with a cooling filter, then adjust the curves for a nice s-shaped curve. From there, you can heal-brush just the green cast off, which works very well for the man's shirt and well-enough for the girl's arm. Unsharp mask the thing, and call it a day. If it was shot as a jpg, there is little you can do to get back some of the highlights or shadows.

[Shacklebolt]

This any better? A bit of iPhoto editing/croppery. I worry that it won't print out well as it's been cropped a LOT at this point, and the image itself full sized is 1499x1883. I do like it more. I'd sacrifice the bottom of the dress for the guy getting cut out.

[Digital Skunk]

I meant, how can I fix this photo as it is. And not, info to make better pictures in the future.

That's the part I didn't get. :D

[pprior]

I'm not usually this blunt, but quite frankly I can't believe anyone paid money for that photo.

the composition is horrid and that pretty much means a delete in my workflow. Where you forced into that position to shoot from? Was your ability to zoom out (either with your feet or with focal length) impaired?

Ok, let's say this was the ONLY picture you had of this girl, and you had to use it (if so, let's talk about your settings and other choices made with the hardware limits you have) - the next thing that is apparent, as commented already is that the color balance is way off.

To fix that, you should ALWAYS in bad lighting conditions (and IMHO always in general unless you're a real good shooter) shoot RAW files. You can set white balance to whatever you want that way later. If the lighting is consistent - shoot a grey card or any other neutral grey item before or after your other pics and then you can use that to set white balance. I keep a small grey card in my camera bag and just take a quick snap whereever I'm shooting just in case. You can also use a white or neutral grey within the picture.

You can work white balance in jpg, but it's not near as good, especially if you have blown highlights, as you do in that picture.

I did a few minutes of PS work on that pic, just to quickly illustrate how composition would change this picture. I'm NOT a PS expert, and this is only a rough draft of what could be done, but it gives you an idea of what I would try to do, if I had ended up with that as my only shot to use. The vignette needs to be toned down and the clone stamp needs refining, but you get the basic idea of what I would try, for whatever it's worth.

I didn't correct color balance, because I'm not sure what things actually were.

http://Prior.smugmug.com/photos/277270161_3EgwS-XL.jpg

Not sure any of this is helpful, but it's mean to be constructive. I'm learning too so others may rightfully disagree with me.

[alembic]

I think greater isolation of the subject would have helped (assuming you weren't after an ensemble shot) e.g. shooting from another angle, zooming in, or waiting until other people on stage were no longer in the viewfinder. Maybe you were trying to do this after the fact when you cropped the original image, but because the woman largely blends in with the background, my eyes are diverted to another area of the frame with a higher contrast in tonality: the white shirt. This dilutes the attention we want on the woman. But if we completely crop out the other person (try it by covering him with your fingers), or imagine him wearing much darker clothing, the woman's face and arms now become the high contrast areas (relatively) and that yields an image where the focus naturally falls on her and remains there.

This concept is much better explained here (http://super.nova.org/DPR/#TOC) and here (http://super.nova.org/DPR/COIforTHOU/). Another example is illustrated by Japanese bunraku (http://www.bunraku.org/) in which the puppeteers' black attire helps to create the illusion that the brighter costumed puppets are performing on stage by themselves.

Waiting for her to turn towards you might have also yielded better modeling of her face and capture more expression as well.

This shooting angle truncates her bent left arm (unfortunate timing). I'd like to have a broad-side view of her left arm also (like the right) not only because it looks better but it may also convey a greater sense of movement.

I don't know whether removing the color cast is necessary here but if you use Photoshop or Photoshop Elements, you may want to fool around with one of the iCorrect plug-ins (http://www.pictocolor.com/oneclick.htm). I use EditLab Pro on most JPGs I receive to quickly remove any color cast and improve contrast. It sure beats doing this manually.

Keep shooting!

[rouxeny]

I think pprior's version is a bit better. It gets rid of some of the distractions.

Without going over all of it again, the composition isn't the best. I'm not a big fan of headless torsos.

I'd agree with the "always shoot in RAW" comments, especially when the situation is not ideal, namely that you have poor lighting or inability to control it.

The biggest thing that bothers me, even more than the color, is that the shot does not tell a story. It doesn't convey that this person is on stage, nor what her role on that stage may be. Is she the lead? Is she one of many backup dancers or singers? A good portrait, which this is in some ways, should always tell you a little bit about the person. I don't know if this one does.

And I don't mean to be harsh, but have you considered giving her a copy of this picture instead of having her pay for it?

However harsh people may be, me included, remember that every artist started as an amateur and that everybody's photo collection is filled with 99% junk. Also, nothing is better than blunt criticism, it's the only way to learn.

[Shacklebolt]

She offered to pay for it.

[mcavjame]

Yep... you need to compensate for the red cast you get from theatre lights. There are some goods suggestions already.

Things like amount of contrast and highlights are subjective. You'll recognize a photographer's style by how an image is shot and finished. I had a peer in college who had everyone in class shoot a portrait of him, then he shot himself holding each of the portraits. He did a great job of maintaining his own style in each of the photos, but what struck everyone was how we could pick out our own photographic style.

I am a little surprised that you don't recognize the misframing of the image. Do you already know what you think is wrong with the photo and are just confirming your analysis? The best part is you can cheat and reframe your image in post.

[Digital Skunk]

Nice illustration pprior. Not to push the comp. topic but the image is easier to swallow with just the female.

A note on toning though. You don't need to have been there to tone. Set the white point and black point and adjust for the color that you know is there, like white, her skin tones, the dress, the floor. Or if you know there is too much casting turn that color down then tweak, tweak, tweak.

[orpheus1120]

You know what? I don't think we are ready for criticism... at all.

Surely all of us will have lotsa explanation for whatever we do. However that's also the reason why we need criticism -- our opinions can sometime be flawed and biased, which is why third-parties views are always invaluable in spotting personal bias.

I've known quite a few pro photographers on this board, so despite whatever explanation you might have for your work, save it for yourself. Learn to take criticism from these professionals and not talk back because this is one of the best way to learn from others. Remember, your thoughts/explanation for doing something that has obviously aroused comments and criticisms from others don't really matter at times, because what matters most is how others feel looking at it visually. Your explanations won't somehow change the visual perception of anyone unless you can somehow hypnotize them. Your work should convey your ideas and knowledge, if it doesn't and the creator has to voice them out, something is wrong.

Photoshopping a subject and changing its captured environment digitally are usually done moderately. The theme and spirit of the photograph must be preserved, which is what most photographers do, except minor tweaking. The major composition and structure of the photo is still preserved.

The altered reality that pprior had done preserves some of the spirits of the occasion, however that said, nothing beats a good capture and composition of the real event, if the photographer can manage to get a good shot at the subjects. If capturing good photos and compositions are that easy, everyone's a pro now.

Shacklebolt, the one thing I think you need to learn right now is how to take a good photograph with the special moment in it, with great composition of course. That's my 2 cents, so hope you don't take offence in what I say.

[Shacklebolt]

Okay.

[SolracSelbor]

The photo just lacks all those qualities that differentiate a professional photo with a common snapshot. Theres absolutely no depth, thought, story, awe factor to this photo. Worst of all, I think the color makes the photo simply hard to look at. Simply, the composition sucks - flat out. For this reason, I don't think any amount of phtoshoping will make this photo anything beside tolerable. It's just one of those shots I look at and say, "Well, at least it'll make a good myspace picture."

I am, however, interested to know how much she offered to pay for it. Looking at this situation as an entrepreneur, the fact that she even paid allowed you to come out on top. However, looking at it as a professional photographer and artist...well you know what I mean.

[SolracSelbor]

Professional photographer...ME? You must be mistaking! I by no means am a professional, you can clearly see that from my photos.

"I'm sorry that I ever gave your post as much attention as I did." so sorry that you had to edit this one in order to state the fact?

I'm just use to seeing some of your better work. Such as this:

Well I have to get going; it's past my bedtime...

[alembic]

Shacklebolt, I'm not an event photographer, having only covered one wedding, a baby shower and a few outdoor concerts. But I know it's plum full of logistics that are usually beyond one's control. I have enough challenges with existing light portraits or travel scenics!

Whenever I ask for criticism I try to realize the feedback I get typically falls under these categories:

1) clear pointers that help me become a better photographer.

2) pointers, though well-intentioned, that miss the mark because the critic misinterpreted the original request (like I did in this case).

3) helpful pointers that are buried by a lack of diplomacy!. e.g. "this sucks; here's how it's done."

4) feedback disguised as helpful criticism to salve the critic's own ego. i.e. "here my chance to diss someone so I can feel good about my stuff."

The first, of course, is the easiest to digest. Sometimes I have to clarify my request to cover the second. Usually a few nuggets can be had from the third type of feedback if I'm able to put away my ego. And the fourth, well, the world could be a boring place without them, I suppose.

Ultimately it's my responsibility to take what's useful. Keep up the good work!

[Digital Skunk]

Honestly, when a shooter enters the environment he his shooting in, the first thing that should be done is setting his camera body up. No matter how hard the lighting may be or the scene, etc etc the photographer should be able to pull out a well lit well exposed photo given the circumstances.

The truly difficult part of photography is producing that image that speaks, everything else is somewhat of a means to an end.

[Keebler]

Hi Shackebolt,

I agree with the suggestion PPrior put to photoshopping the other 2 bodies out of the picture. That is the way to go. They do create quite a distraction. And using the vignette or another method will draw attention to her and the colours of her outfit.

As for the petty squabbling b/n solarsac or whatever his name is - you asked for opinions and suggestions so you have to deal with the consequences. You may or may not approve of them, let alone approve of the individual giving them, but you should have taken the high road, said thanks and left it at that. imho.

As for the photograph itself, I am in no way a professional so I won't offer any solutions. I have learned some good tips from the other posts though.

Good luck,
Keebler

PS. you posted another cropped photo and my only thought on that is that you might not have left enough space to the left of her right arm elbow for framing. It would be great if you could leave an inch so when she frames it (assuming she will), then there's enough depth there.

[pprior]

Nice illustration pprior. Not to push the comp. topic but the image is easier to swallow with just the female.

A note on toning though. You don't need to have been there to tone. Set the white point and black point and adjust for the color that you know is there, like white, her skin tones, the dress, the floor. Or if you know there is too much casting turn that color down then tweak, tweak, tweak.

I saw nothing in the picture to which I could ascribe a white point other than burnt highlights which are unreliable.

Yes I could have spent a lot of time in curves tweaking color, but my goal was to spend a few minutes and show just a bit of composition change and how it would affect the photo.

I'm saddened to see the short temper in the above postings. I thought the crticism was reasonable. I know we all feel a bit of personal attack when our images are criticized, but I would advise that if you're going to post an image for C&C that you just take a deep breath and take whatever criticism you get for better or worse. As very well written above, how OTHERS see your images can tell you a lot about what you might be missing because of your own internal bias. We see our own work differently because of our vision that may not be fully seen by others.

[Shacklebolt]

That wasn't apparent. The first thing I'd do (and I don't think the dress merging with the background is horrible- it depends on where you want the eye to focus) is I'd re-tone the white garment to some darker color. Your eye is immediately drawn to the lighter areas, and there's not anything "interesting" there to see. I'd start by toning it dark grey or black and see what that does to the overall dynamic.

This is useful criticism, and helpful advice.

I'm not usually this blunt, but quite frankly I can't believe anyone paid money for that photo.

the composition is horrid and that pretty much means a delete in my workflow. Where you forced into that position to shoot from? Was your ability to zoom out (either with your feet or with focal length) impaired?

This just isn't, and more than that, it's flat out wrong. I was shooting from a balcony 60 feet away. This was a dance show - they weren't just striking poses. I shot the show from four different angles, about 650 pictures in an hour and a half, which is pretty standard. I happened to be in _this_ place when this number came on. Of course my movement was impaired. I had a railing and 10 people standing directly behind me. I can thus only presume that those were rhetorical questions.

Alright- as everyone has said, your color is off, but more specifically, it's too warm. There are some blown highlights, and there is a green cast on the man's shoulder and the girl's arm. . If you were to look at a histogram, you'd be able to tell that the image is flat, and thus needs more contrast, and, obviously, to be sharpened.

In you place, I'd start off with a cooling filter, then adjust the curves for a nice s-shaped curve. From there, you can heal-brush just the green cast off, which works very well for the man's shirt and well-enough for the girl's arm. Unsharp mask the thing, and call it a day. If it was shot as a jpg, there is little you can do to get back some of the highlights or shadows.

This is useful criticism, and helpful advice.

[gwuMACaddict]

This thread reminds me why I don't spend much time here anymore... you sound like a couple of 9 year olds fighting at the local playground...

Ask for criticism, then can't take it.

Sheesh.

:rolleyes:

[SLC Flyfishing]

This thread reminds me why I don't spend much time here anymore... you sound like a couple of 9 year olds fighting at the local playground...

Ask for criticism, then can't take it.

Sheesh.

:rolleyes:

Agreed, if you post a thread called "What's wrong with this picture?" you'd better be ready for a lot of opinions. I'm of the opinion that there's nothing special about it, a snapshot and nothing more. But hey, if the gal likes it that much then good for you! It's only her opinion that matters right?

In the future, you'd do better to make yourself open to all critism, if you ask for any that is.

I think the professional photographer comment Carlos made was referring to you. What I gather he meant was that from an entrepreneurial standpoint (you) you made some cash, that's awesome. But from the standpoint of considering yourself to be a professional photographer or someone who has aspirations to become one, that's not a good photo to have someone showing around town with your reputation attached to it! That's all he meant.

SLC

[shecky]

everyone stop.

put away your egos.

read this. now:

how to give criticism (http://n8tip.com/the-hamburger-method-of-constructive-criticism-works-for-vegetarians-too)

and this:

how to accept criticism with grace and appreciation. (http://zenhabits.net/2007/09/how-to-accept-criticism-with-grace-and-appreciation/)

[pprior]

This is useful criticism, and helpful advice.



This just isn't, and more than that, it's flat out wrong. I was shooting from a balcony 60 feet away. This was a dance show - they weren't just striking poses. I shot the show from four different angles, about 650 pictures in an hour and a half, which is pretty standard. I happened to be in _this_ place when this number came on. Of course my movement was impaired. I had a railing and 10 people standing directly behind me. I can thus only presume that those were rhetorical questions.


No they were just meant to clarify. I'm not sure what experience or expertise you have in shooting and quite frankly it looked to me as though you were not prepared to take this picture. The angle, the composition and the framing are all just wrong.

If you're forced into a shooting position you do the best you can, but since you seemed to be shooting hte middle of your zoom range at the very least you could have zoomed out a bit for more room to manipulate the framing.

If you're trying to shoot a bunch of people and not really able to plan your position for a given shot, then you do the best you can, but personally I would have avoided being up in that balcony if at all possible from the looks of it.

My comments were made in good faith and I personally feel have some value in the discussion. You can of course discount them if they don't match your shooting style, but I'll say once again that this shot would never be one I would be showing in a portfolio of work, and therefore I think you should get a bit thicker skin when it comes to the comments made on it.

There are two things that ultimately matter:

1) does the client like the picture (#1 - apparently yes since you said she bought it, so good job).
2) Will other people who the client shows it to like it and generate more business - here I think you'll fall down on this shot.

Cheers and again my comments made in the best of faith and with good intentions to you.

[Digital Skunk]

I saw nothing in the picture to which I could ascribe a white point other than burnt highlights which are unreliable.

Yes I could have spent a lot of time in curves tweaking color, but my goal was to spend a few minutes and show just a bit of composition change and how it would affect the photo.

I'm saddened to see the short temper in the above postings. I thought the crticism was reasonable. I know we all feel a bit of personal attack when our images are criticized, but I would advise that if you're going to post an image for C&C that you just take a deep breath and take whatever criticism you get for better or worse. As very well written above, how OTHERS see your images can tell you a lot about what you might be missing because of your own internal bias. We see our own work differently because of our vision that may not be fully seen by others.

I agree, and trust me the main reason I don't post images here is because I don't want someone I don't know critiquing my photos. A lot of posters want to be Pro, but don't want to put out the work. The staff at my paper does a much better job of judging my work and giving me professional advice. And I know them, and can see their work as well.

Not that I wouldn't do it if I didn't work for the paper, but if I did post an image it would be one I feel would stand a chance, then listen to the well tempered advice of others while taking it all in with a grain of salt.

Getting back on topic. When you set the white point you're just picking the brightest spot on the photo, even if it has a yellow cast. The app will adjust color slightly to make that point white, if it's supposed to be white (don't go picking the wrong color that is ;) ) After that 60% of the toning is done.

everyone stop.

put away your egos.

read this. now:

how to give criticism (http://n8tip.com/the-hamburger-method-of-constructive-criticism-works-for-vegetarians-too)

and this:

how to accept criticism with grace and appreciation. (http://zenhabits.net/2007/09/how-to-accept-criticism-with-grace-and-appreciation/)

If anyone else went to journalism or comm studies school, then they would have read that, been involved with that, taught it to other students, and then went through it with just about every job/internship/conference they go to. And a lot of times the pros critiquing your stuff don't go through the motions.... they just rip your ***** to pieces. If you're lucky, they do it with a nod and a tossing of your folio, if not, they sit there and rag on it for minutes, in front of your competition.

p.s. The biggest problem with critiquing anyone's anything on this site, or the net in general is weak emotions and arrogance. If you say something about someone's mockup/photo/website/etc. you get attacked, so you have to dumb your responses down to make them feel good about their bad or not so good work. And they still attack you for it.

As I said in the mockup thread for MBPs.... it's just a sign of youth. Young people these days whine more than any generation I have grown up with, and I am not that old. If you don't say what they want to hear, you must be ..... you get the point. Can't tell them anything.

[mac 2005]

Wow! Did this thread ever get off track.

Criticism is a tricky subject and should be approached only with people who are qualified to give it. The problem is that most people lack the knowledge and/or the verbal skills to give legitimate advice in a way that engages the person asking for the critique, is constructive and feels safe.

From what I saw, the OP asked for comments beyond "It sucks" and, in the process, got more than s/he intended. Too many people went off on tangents because, I suppose, they see the Internet as an anonymous venue for ******-tossing.

Of the legitimate comments I saw on this thread, far too many of them strayed beyond the technical insight the OP wanted and made values judgments that did not offer perspective on aperture, shutter speed, composition or depth of field. Criticizing the OP for not doing what you clearly would have done neither provides a legitimate criticism nor positions your criticism as credible or worth reading. We all have to learn somehow; personally, I've learned more from my mistakes than my successes. With respect to speaking down to someone from the vantage point of your experience, if you're able to learn from an insult, good for you, but that isn't what the OP requested. If you can't provide respectful criticism, then either don't offer it or don't blame the other person for being offended by your offensive comments.

This isn't rocket science; it all goes back to what we learned in grade school. If you want to play in the sandbox, don't throw sand in the other kids' faces.

[Digital Skunk]

Wow! Did this thread ever get off track.

Enough said.....

Moderators, you may close the thread when ready!

[pprior]

No come on guys, we shouldn't need a moderator to babysit.

And besides, I too really want to know how much was paid for that picture.

[mac 2005]

So if you have a problem with me, send me a PM instead of thread-drifting.

At the risk of "thread-drifting," whatever that is, I think a much more appropriate analogy would be...

"Arguing on the Internet is like fighting in the mud. Even if you win, you feel dirty."

[xUKHCx]

Moderators, you may close the thread when ready!

There is the post report button that people should use to bring it to the attention of moderators. We can't read every post here on MacRumors.
The report post button looks like this http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/buttons/report.gif and should be on the left side of every post

No come on guys, we shouldn't need a moderator to babysit.

I beg to differ, this thread went off track and needed attention long ago. It is now closed and will remain closed permanently.