2 Pink.jpg
by Temperpolk

Comment by taterbug:
mk's comment I think is pretty much spot on. I would agree about the lighting and yeah, maybe a very slightly tighter crop. There's not really a single strong subject point, but I think it works overall, as a fill the frame type shot. What kind of post processing do you do? this looks like it could maybe benefit from a little usm, and maybe some levels/curves (tonal) tweaking, and a touch of color management tweaking, although this could be just a matter of taste.

Bugsy.jpg
by Temperpolk

Comment by taterbug:
That's a good looking cat. I like how you've avoided the classic mistake of shooting down at animals (kids too) and you've gotten down close to his level. The lighting looks kind of harsh though, like onboard flash. Onboard flash is notorious for being hard to work with, often times seeming harsh and un natural, many people try to avoid it, unless using for fill. Much better to use some kind of controllable light, or available natural light. Also, the focus point seems to be a little off for this type of shot. When shooting animals or people, generally you want the eyes to be sharp, here, the sharp point appears to be on his nose and brow. Kritters can be really difficult to get good shots of :-)

Agueda.jpg
by Temperpolk

Comment by mk:
I like this one. There's a lot going on but it doesn't feel too busy. It has lots of interesting shapes and colors and is composed in a way that leads the eye around but doesn't let it escape the photo. I'll ditto what chimeric said about leveling the horizon, though.

2 Pink.jpg
by Temperpolk

Comment by mk:
The focus on this is certainly better than your other flower shot but you're dealing with rather harsh light here. It can be difficult with dark shadows and very bright sunlight so get the proper range. In this case, you've lost a fair bit of detail on both ends. You might try waiting for a slightly softer light when the sun isn't directly overhead or using some kind of diffuser. Actually, now that I look closer, it looks like maybe this was taken inside? In any case, same idea...softer light, perhaps more to the side.

Compositionally, I think this is fine. I might crop in such a bit closer on the top to remove the bottoms of the flowers on the top edge.

Hiding from the Sun.JPG
by Temperpolk

Comment by photokariangel:
very noisy. But i do like the photo, maybe doing an Unsharpen mask (if you have the programs to do that sort of thing) would help it out. Love the halo around it.

Florence.JPG
by Temperpolk

Comment by chimericvisions:
If you spend any money on your camera, the filter adapter and a polarizer should be your first purchases. This is another photo that would greatly benefit from the polarizer. It would cut the haze in the sky and the reflections on the water, as well as bring out the deep blues in the sky.

It looks like the entire photo has a slight blue cast to it, as well. You might want to adjust the color temperature a little higher.

Tower.JPG
by Temperpolk

Comment by chimericvisions:
I like the idea you were going for - it's just too bad that part of the tower is obscured by the roof edges.

Agueda.jpg
by Temperpolk

Comment by chimericvisions:
There isn't anything particularly drawing about this, but there's nothing wrong with the subject.

Sometimes it can be difficult to tell, but ensuring that your horizon is flat is a good idea.

Blush.JPG
by Temperpolk

Comment by chimericvisions:
I'd give this a 90^ CW rotation. Looking at the grass sideways is distracting. Other than that, the focus is good - the lighting could be better, but isn't horrible. If you used a flash, that could be the problem.

red.JPG
by Temperpolk

Comment by chimericvisions:
Ditto what howzitboy said. If you want to get that close to your subject, make sure you set your camera to Macro focus. Some sort of neutral background would have been a good idea. Also, a tripod instead of the flash at that range. Almost all of the highlights are completely blown out.