Sunset Fire (original - no edits, no filters)
by glad2badad

Comment by Shakey:
Really I dont get how it mets the challenge of being inovative or a"style"
It just looks like a bad photo to me . Like you sneezed when you took this picture.
I dont get it at all.
Sorry a 4 from me

Watchful Eye
by glad2badad

Comment by MadJayhawk:
This is a beautiful picture of a beautiful animal. There is a certain subtle tenseness I can sense in the picture that grabs my attention. The color and detail is outstanding. I gave it a 9 - one of two 9s I gave.

Illusional Angles
by glad2badad

Comment by bpickard:
Nice colours but perhaps a little mundane. Have you thought about getting much closer or further away?

Sunset Fire (original - no edits, no filters)
by glad2badad

Comment by Camazine:
lovely

Sunset Fire (original - no edits, no filters)
by glad2badad

Comment by mannjudit:
How many likes have I deleted as good-for-nothing! It was wrong. I should have kept them and create a new style, I'm afraid.

Watchful Eye
by glad2badad

Comment by Jutilda:
The best animal shot I've seen!!!! 10!!

It all adds up.......eventually!
by glad2badad

Comment by glad2badad:
He-he, at least I stirred the curiosity of one member - eh Martin (nsbca7). ;-)

It all adds up.......eventually!
by glad2badad

Comment by nsbca7:

Originally posted by glad2badad: Last day of voting on the Bokeh challenge and STILL discussing bokeh and the various definitions. This has certainly been a hot topic. :-) I'm not proclaiming to be an expert, FAR FAR from it - but I do like to see all sides represented fairly, especially when the subject matter is actively being voted on in a current challenge. Therefore - here is a definition of bokeh that I find interesting and should be considered by active voters. The following is an excerpt from What is Bokeh by KenRockwell. //www.kenrockwell.com/tech/bokeh.htm Fig. 1. Poor Bokeh. This is a greatly magnified blur circle showing very poor bokeh. Note how the edge is sharply defined and even emphasized for a point that is supposed to be out-of-focus, and that the center is dim. Fig 2. Neutral Bokeh. This is a a technically perfect and evenly illuminated blur circle. This isn't good either for bokeh, because the edge is still well defined. Out-of-focus objects, either points of light or lines, can effectively create reasonably sharp lines in the image due to the edges of the sharp blur circle. This is the blur circle from with most modern lenses designed to be "perfect." Fig. 3. Good Bokeh. Here is what we want. This is great for bokeh since the edge is completely undefined. This also is the result of the same spherical aberration, but in the opposite direction, of the poor example seen in Fig. 1. This is where art and engineering start to diverge, since the better looking image is the result of an imperfection. Perfect bokeh demands a Gaussian blur circle distribution, and lenses are designed for the neutral example shown in 2.) above.

Illusional Angles
by glad2badad

Comment by Kylie:
10 all the way. Great pcik.

Watchful Eye
by glad2badad

Comment by e301:
I'd be pleased with it, as a portrait of a dog. The purple finging around the right ear is a shame, but would be correctible under decent editing rules. As a portrait, however, it is simply that: there is no other element to this shot, no particular context, reference, etc. What I'm saying is that whilst it's admirable for what it is, it doesn't get a high rating from me because i think photography can be about so much more than this.