Hey Daveman,

Thanks for sharing your photograph. I am trying to figure out if the new criteria that we are using makes things more anxiety provoking for people or if they like the fact that there are some real criteria with which to judge the photos with.

I know that Roman rated it already, but I figure the more the merrier. I am going to rate it as following:

Composition/use of frame space = 2.5 - 3
I think that the composition has a lot of potential. My only gripe is that there is a lot of clutter in the center of the photograph that distracts the eye. For example the branches in the top corner and center of the frame. Otherwise, the photo has a nice 'flow' and the eyes follow well to the bottom right of the photograph.

Colors/White Balance = 4
The photograph seems rich, and the colors seem natural.

Exposure = 5
The exposure seems well captrured throughout - shadows and highlights all seem in order.

Creative use of Aperture/Shutter = 3
The aperture looks narrow - everything is in focus. It is pretty standard for a shot like this.

Perspective = 3 - 4
As I was mentioning earlier, the image flows well. It has a sense of size to it that is captured on the paper. Well done.

Creativity = 3
The image is definitly not a 'common' shot of a common stream. It is a bit different - though it does not capture my imagination.

Emotion = 3
I think that this show would speak much more to me if it jumped out more. Because of all of the clutter, I find it hard for the photo to grab me in the ways that Roman mentioned.

Forethought/Visualization = 2
I agree with Roman here. The problem with this image is that it lacks the 'wow' factor. It is a nice photograph, but I think you wind up losing the forest (or in this case, the stream) for all of the trees.

Post processing = 4
A very nice, solid job keeping all of the highlights and shadow tones in line. Well done.

I hear what you are talking about in terms of the desire to drive right back and re-take the photo, LOL. I feel that every time I am done on a trip.

James