>>3080313Don't get me wrong, I really like your shot and certainly, people would prefer it to most other shots posted here, but in terms of significance/interestingness, it's on the same level as any other shot posted in this thread.
Breaking the shot down to the important questions "when?, where?, what/who?", it answers only a single one of these and the answer would be "some boy".
To refer to your "critique":
>This is just a building on its own. An ok picture though.Thanks. I took that shot for the repeating geometry.
>I don't see anything here.It's impossible to look at a photo and "don't see anything". What you meant was "I don't see anything here that interests me", which is something completely different to what you actually stated.
It's a landscape shot and shows the trail leading through the woods to the restaurant/radio station ontop of that particular "hill". So, in terms of above questions, it answers as many of these questions as your shot and the answer would be "some building in the woods".
>That cat is doing nothing interesting..That's because it's a cat ;)
Anyway, I posted that shot as it's recent and shows the described method of measuring light and developing also works for other films - as I also stated in that post.
