So I assume you got written consent from the bum and all those pigeons? Why are you still arguing composition, don't you understand this is about cameras?? Gee let me thing the "professional" photographer says some of the most high-school hitting comments like "post some pictures hot shot , and we'll see who's the big man on campus".
Then you proceed to go, "well let me think, we were talking about camera image quality... so let me post some "enhanced" pictures of mine." Thats like me going, hey post something about quantum mechanics, then going oh gee, you're so stupid here is my doctoral thesis on quantum field effects. And by enhanced, you all but said you shot in raw, meaning you can expose it anyway you like, you really got hung up on exposure but nobody said a damn thing about your cameras underexposing. If you had the real images you would notice things that wouldn't show up if you exposed them more, like water droplets.
Further more, my images weren't supposed to be great works of art, they were keeping with the theme of what a camera can do, so buzz off. There was no white ballance problem, I walk around those buildings every day they are perfect. And if you think that you would just "zip" around that pond, then I think you'd be huffing and puffing when you got around the giant pool, and I don't have a lens anywhere near long enough to shoot from that far away. I think the blurry people isolate and frame the couple, and it gives wonderful depth of field, if only they weren't blinking.
But if we are going to comment, anybody cares,
First image, WTF is this, you take your camera into the supermarket one day and see some girls "dancing". I just don't like this image, the light is way overblown, not that it matters. The dairy is overblown, and the "dancers" are in awkward blurry positions. I don't know why anybody would like this image.
second, I think this looks bland, the sky is all one color, the ground is all one color, it kinda looks like watercolor or something.
third, now this is a truely bland stock image, all we are given to look at is some light streaks and a sign, woopty do.
the "birdman", this is nice, I like this image. Again, I don't suppose you happen to have the written consent form anywhere?
The statue, I'm not really sure about this image, something about the color composition just kinda makes me not like it, but this is probably me.
The woman in red, WOW, not sure what to say about this, the image is fine, almost like you understand the theme of posing images instead of works of art. Not sure who would like this though, or where it would be published, Overly Extravagant Elderly?
Product shots, nothing wrong with those, but as far as things that I would actually want hanging on a wall or something, not really catching subject material. Not to mention obviously shot in a studio under studio lighting.
The girl holding sign. Wow you have the gaul to tell me that my image has white balance problems?? The look at the white balloons at various distances. But again, why is this here? and you're telling me mine are bland compositions. Oh the ironies.
Nothing wrong with the nephew except that you are harping on me being unimaginative and then you do it yourself.
Model, another good shot, but OMG is she centered in your frame?!?! why wouldn't you leave her some room in front of her to give her the apearance of movement
I'm tired of this.
I'm tired of people saying "powerbook G5 next tuesday"
And I'm tired of you coming into every thread about something even remotely related to photography and acting the a conceited jerk.
EDIT: You know what, the minute the wedding couple stepped into a PUBLIC venue made it so I could take the image. If they didn't want anyone to see them they should have done it in a back yard somewhere. Also you niggle about not having much detail on the statue, what about your statue picture? What am I looking at, a wall?
