If you don't format in the camera you might have a problem, but slowly but surely the amount of space available on the card will reduce as it will have unnecessary folders on it.

As sensible housekeeping, it's not much trouble to format a card in camera.

I'm going to guess that it's because oif colour space differences and how the colours are displayed on the two monitors.

Bluebells are notorious for being a problem to photograph on film because of the large amount of UV light they reflect. It's not such a problem with digital, but I suspect that there are colours in your image that don't display on the screen but are there when you print.

In other words, the colour gamut of the printer means you are printing colours you cannot see on the laptop.

I'd check that all cameras and Photoshops are set to the same colour space. Maybe you have one on sRGB and one on AdobeRGB?

Style is something that defines your image making - it is the personality of your photography. It is you.

These images display a style - they are intimate and direct and also compassionate to their subjects.

I think you already have your style.

Nice pictures, you've got a great sense of style in them. And whatever focal length you have used, you have preserved a sense of connection with the subjects.

Very impressive.

There is a real technical reason, and that is that the 135mm means a distant viewpoint that tends to flatten features. It's borderline for portraits, but.....it doesn't mean to say that you can't use it.

If you have the vision, go for it. Don't forget to show us some pictures! (of your own)

Just a reminder that the competition was stretched to one and a half weeks this time.

Life In Motion is quite a demanding subject I think - I know I had to think awhile about it!

Well it's your photography, so the key question is do you think it's too long for portraits?

If not, shoot away!

Have they formatted a card in the camera? Fresh batteries? Otherwise, as you say, probably "caput" and in need of replacement or repair.

There is a psychological aspect to this as well. If you used a wide angle lens, you would be very close and the portrait would not only be distorted but also very intrusive. It would violate "personal space" and be uncomfortable.

A very long lens reduces communication and interaction with the model and becomes voyeuristic and detached, the person is diminished as an individual.

It all depends on what effect you want, and if portraits with a fish-eye lens are done in the right way then no doubt it would be possible to take stunning portraits. You would have to be very skilled to pull that one off though.

The point is that to get a close portrait you need to move close, so with a wide angle lens the nose looks too big compared to the ears.

A standard lens will do, but the most natural portrait (if that is what you want) will be obtained with a short telephoto lens.

In 35mm terms the 85mm is the classic lens, 100mm is fine and 135mm just a bit too long.

In terms of digital (APS-C) then 60mm would be about right, or slightly longer. In fact the 18-55mm zoom is just fine at the long end!