Just to be clear, the criteria for judging mean absolute impartiality and a fair viewing for all the images. It also means that sometimes images do well that the judge doesn't actually like. For example, I personally don't go much for sports pictures, but I can recognise a good one.

Often in competitions, regardless of the care taken, we can find that we don't agree with the choice that the judges make. That is quite normal and there's not a lot can be done about it.

It is however a litttle harsh on the image in question as it is after all a powerful black and white creation, albeit it with some weakness at the bottom of the image, as mentioned in the appraisal. I'm happy with it as a worthy third place.

Everyone can have their turn at appraising the images. The winner chooses the next week's competition, judges it and has the final say on who wins and who comes close.

Please remember it's to be enjoyed, not agonised over, so let's have some good entries now for Lilly's new competition.

Dirk, I don't take offence, I just did not know what you meant, so thank you for the expanded explanation.

Not sure I understand that. If it's got anything to do with whatever was said in the discussion then I would not be aware of it for the simple reason that I didn't look at the images until it was time to judge and I didn't take part in the discussion or take any note of it.

So I have to say I have no idea what you mean. Do please explain?

Chris E A moody, dark image with excellent placement of all the various elements. Commended

Daniel Bridge Quite the opposite to the feel of the previous shot. This is light and airy and is only slightly let down by the large bland area at bottom left. Otherwise a nicely done image.

lenscape A nice tight composition with superb lighting on the building and a good sky. The bland area to bottom right holds us into the image because it acts as a dark frame. Commended

dirk 1000 A wonderful subject although I feel there could be higher contrast, more “bite”. There is a degree of conflict between the dominant statue and the fantastic background. Perhaps this says something about the contrast between the power of nature and the power of man.

McBrian A brilliant and simple composition. The technique applied gives real drama, the only question mark for me being the lightness of the base. I would burn it in a little more, especially at the left. Nevertheless a cracking good shot and THIRD PLACE.

justgetoutandride There is a mass of dark, wonderful detail in the foreground that cries out for something in there to really grab our attention. A focal point. The banding in the sky, one light band dividing the image and then a dark band, is unfortunate. This is not an easy subject and with one dominant feature to lock onto it could be transformed.

Nimitz I take the point about the contrasts in the subject matter, but I think that for one shot that is perhaps too many subjects. They compete for attention. The choice of composition is excellent, but it is all rather “busy”

Ammonyte A fantastic shot with superb composition and style. If it were not for those fences I think it could well have been one of my top three. The man made intrusion is a shame in a very fine IR shot. An inspired choice of effect. VERY HIGHLY COMMENDED

hefty1 A mournful and menacing look from this beast but I would like more sharpness and a more surreal look, perhaps with a different arrangement.

Lilly This ancient and powerful being thrusts upwards from the earth and gives Lilly a superb monochrome image. It is a wonderful shot and although I personally would have made it darker that is a judgement call to which there is no right answer. Without doubt THE WINNER! Well done, Lilly!

Galoot This is a good subject and the right approach, using the panoramic format to enhance the composition. Unfortunately the dark on the left and light on the right is divisive to the image, so I think a work around with different viewpoints would have made a big difference.

Hazza A nice idea here. Borderline for considering it to be monochrome, more monochromatic colour in my eyes…I think the moon is a bit too stark in the image and doesn’t really gel with the grasses. It looks too added and a bit more subtlety would help.

Malo1961 An absolutely fantastic sky that needs a better foreground to make this a stronger overall image. I love the blackness in that sky.

Clarky A good choice of sepia toning is consistent with the image. We have two subjects though and the small church competes for attention. I would go in closer and get behind that fence with a wide angle lens.

ronniebchristian A great sky but again a better foreground would help to set if off to better advantage. Maybe moving in closer to the posts would help. As the composition stands, the positioning of the posts is definitely right.

gartmore I was undecided if this was landscape at all, but it could be Architectural Landscape just as well as someone could have chosen the Human Landscape. As this image relies heavily on its detail I do feel that it needs to be much sharper. Interesting idea though.

Kim C Now this image is not ultra sharp either, but in this case that is in keeping with the subject matter. A very nice soft focus monochrome landscape in the traditional form, with impeccable composition. It could have been taken at any time in the last 150 years and the style of early mono images has been well captured. SECOND PLACE.

pnjmcc I like the way the dark areas concentrate our eye on the central point of the composition. It’s unfortunate that there is not a strong centre of interest and the image has been degraded by flare.

niblue Very mysterious and the right effect, but a bit over-messy in terms of composition. Simplification and one main centre of interest would tighten things up.

kcmadr A very nice feel to this calm image, but not monochrome in my opinion.

pschlute A good lead in and a minimalistic approach, but a lead in to…what? I think we need something there to satisfy our eye when in reaches the end of its journey along the path.

Howard J This is an interesting view and it has made decide to go and have a look for myself. The tilting horizon and the water running out of the frame at bottom right detract so a slight modification of viewpoint might be helpful. We can compare shots after I’ve been to have a look and I’ve discovered that your position is the only possible one!

karma mechanic Another nice idea and a great lead-in, but again it needs something to be there for us to look at. I’m not sure I like the effect on the branches and leaves but it has been well done.

AdrianP I’m wondering why we are looking from the edge of the circle and outwards to the right where there is nothing. I would have tried to look into the circle from this position to keep us inside the image rather than wandering off. There’s good emphasis on one stone. The biggest shame is that nothing is really sharp. A good subject though and worth a revisit.

davem A good subject that is far too small in the frame. All the interest is in the boats and I would suggest they are too small and there are too many for one picture. Perhaps going in close and looking at one subject would help.

JamesW-77 You probably needed to be on the other side of the barbed wire fence as it forms a barrier to our viewing the subject. Otherwise a moody and dramatic shot. The viaduct could do with a bit of straightening.


And that's it! A very interesting set of excellent pictures. Where I've made suggestions I hope that will be helpful and everyone should feel encouraged that the overall standard is so high. Many congratulations to everyone!

And now if Lilly would take up the task for the next competition.....

Thanks to everyone who has posted entries this week. The competition is now closed and the judging will be done Monday evening.

So the new competition is "The Monochrome Landscape" which should give plenty of possibilities.

The interpretation is up to you!

Closing time is as usual Midnight on Sunday, 18th November.

That's a bit of a mystery because my alternatives are sat quite happily in my Display Properties dialog box, along with all the standard Windows xp ones.

Having said that, I routinely use at least five different xp computers and all the versions of Windows do have very slight differences in behaviour or detail, so maybe this is one of the minor variations?

If the indicated exposure was 1/125 sec at f8 on Av setting, for example, then dialling in -1EV compensation would give you 1/250 sec at f8. You can see this for yourself if you look at the camera readout.

As regards exposure, like slides, over-exposure kills an image, hence the advice to under-expose if anything. But it's also true that the lighter tones have more information. The real answer is to meter accurately and some digital users would IMHO benefit enormously from trying a slide film or two. They might be shocked at how bad their metering was and learn to improve it. This would reap tremendous benefits when using digital.

My preference is to avoid blown out highlights but to give an accurate exposure. If anything, though, I would definitely under-expose. You can pull detail out of shadows but you can't out of blown out areas.

Welcome, Fiona!

Digital is the same as everything else, just a means to an end. Whether we use film, dihital capture or a sketchbook doesn't matter. What matters is the creative process and the fact that we enjoy expressing ourselves.

So have fun!

Like your competition entry as well.

As a side note, just a thought regarding what white balance achieves. It gives us a neutral, accurate colour balance where grey is grey and white is white.

However, we might not always want that. How about glowing skin tones (81A filter on film) or the gorgeous reds of a fine sunset...AWB would try to "correct" these.

So for particulat effects I might use Cloudy setting (81A filter) or Daylight for the sunset and certainlt Tungsten for incandescent lighting where it is the only lighting.

So getting the white balance "right" isn't always best for the image. A fine example is the warm glow of the filters they use when filming "Doctor Who". Cardiff light isn't really that colour!