i like your style, nice colors

Well there you go.......for you the image is ruined by an anomoly between elements,for me that anomoly is an important element of the complete "look" of the image.
The complete image is greater than the sum of it's parts.

I do indeed see the value in people pointing out where I move away from accepted practise in how Photo montage is put together,a learning experience for them if you like......but as I delight in breaking/bending established rules and practise it means I'm always going to be replying(I do have a sense of integrity after all...I've been in the Photography field for more than two decades and come from a traditional graphic design background) to critique when it's pointing out the obvious,as you have just done.

Maybe I should add a little paragraph with each image submitted to the effect that "THIS IMAGE DOES NOT/WILL NOT CONFORM TO YOUR EXPECTATIONS OF COMPOSITION OR TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE AS POSSIBLY EXPECTED BY THE PHOTMONTAGE/MANIP COMMUNITY....I PREFER MY OWN APPROACH!"

Technical excellence in perspective,graduation of tone and hue through distance,loss of detail and contrast through perspective are elements I prefer to disregard at the risk of compromising my acceptance as some kind of "artist" who has a comprehensive grasp of his craft.

As an example look at the image in my linked gallery entitled"ease" from in the graveyard.The monuments and obelisks in the background are almost sharper than the elements of the foregound...an impossible reality....when I add distance blur and reduce tonal/contrast values then the picture becomes shit(some would perhaps say it's shit anyway... " border="0" alt="icon_smile.gif" /> everyone has an opinion) and changes to something I don't like.

If people here(or anywhere on the net where I post my work) see my images as containing noob mistakes and elements then that's perfectly fine by me.....perhaps they need to understand that "art" is not about conformity and following prescribed rules as set down by the majority but breaking/bending those rules to please and delight the minority.

The minority being one unique individual........myself.




This is as far as I'll go in talking about this image.........I normally avoid strong colour in my images but this one had to be an exception....we all associate primary colours with clowns and the circus,so that car HAD to be postbox red.
When people view the image I want them to see it in this order(it's basically the inverted "golden triangle") from the start:

Eye falls on CAR then up to TEXT then across to FACE then back down to CAR.
Now if tonal/contrast values where the same as we would expect in reality then perhaps the same eye movement wouldn't happen in this way......perhaps the contrast of the text on a pure white background would be the first element seen.....that's not what I want.
Like all art,images,constructs and writing,the output(for want of a better word) should seek to move and have an impact on the viewer...we have to manipulate "how" the image is first percieved.





Maybe it will be of a little interest for some here to see an element of this montage before I got my manip fingers on it......just to see how anything in your environment can change if YOU have imagination to utilise it.
(sorry if that sounds up it's own arse but I can't put it any more eloquently than that!)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v112/hei...ket/source1.jpg


(for better readability I've come back to edit this post)