we get it. it's a good night shot of a bridge.

http://www.weeklyshot.org/theme/night/featured/38/

...schmee, in the long and honored W.S. tradition of twice-featured shots, at least this one is not identical to the other. e.g.,

http://www.weeklyshot.org/theme/rust/response/98/

http://www.weeklyshot.org/theme/lines/featured/60/

(No offense intended, Montage & Flatline...you know I am a fan).

Strueth! (Australian for "Oh my goodness I can't believe the response to this"). Thankyou for your comments and your VERY generous scores.
I debated whether to post this shot because as Craig referred to, it was featured in the Night theme a few weeks back. On one hand I felt like I was taking the easy way out by using a similar image and on the other I felt like it was far more relevant for this theme than the night theme. So on that basis I decided to post it.
It is not exactly the same image as last time. Sure it was taken in the same session and from the very same spot, but it is a different shot with different processing and that's how I justified posting it.
I promise I'll only use it again here if we have a "Sydney Harbour at Night" theme :)
I am rambling now so thanks again everyone.

Waheey! Nice work mate. The B&W conversion works really well.

i don't mean to nitpick. if you posted the same shot twice that's your right, but checking the exif of the two shots indicates that they have the exact same properties across the board. why would you take the same 23 second exposure in the same minute?

schmee - In my best detectives voice - "very interesting". No hard feelings, and I honestly don't mind the "nitpick" :) Since you raised the point, I have checked out the exif properties also and it looks like you could be right. So I guess we could assume that it is the same photo...or not. I honestly do not know for sure. That particular night I took about 50 shots from the same area so when I saw this theme I went straight for the archives and tried to pick the best shot to convert that would be different to the previous post. I chose this one without looking at the exif properties. So if it is the same one then sincere apologies to anyone who feels I was trying to mislead them by saying it was a different shot. Not my intention at all. If different then hey. Like I said, good point, no hard feelings and if anyone has OJ Simpson's legal team on speed dial please let me know :)

So what if you occasionally post the same shot? A serial same-shot poster would end up being boring...unless the shot was so freaking awesome it just always blew my socks off. But posting the same shot, even identically the same shot makes no difference to me. Go for it Pedro.

i'm not at all bothered by someone posting the same photo twice, but i do think it's somewhat counter to the point of weeklyshot.

is not the point of this site to get honest critical feedback on the photos you post? so what then is the point in posting the shot again when the community has already chimed in with their opinion?

On the contrary, I have had shots featured twice, and have been really tempted to repost them AGAIN. If it fits, why not? I have to admit it's kind of boring, and we're here because we consider this a creative pursuit. Creativity comes with an expectation of originality, so I understand that reposting the same image is kind of lame... but what the heck?!

"If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit!"

... I was looking for a snappy slogan to close with, but that's the best I could think of.

In my best politicians voice now "you all have a good point".

I agree that photography is a creative pursuit and as such a degree of originality should be expected. I also admit that it is not original to post the same exact image twice. Obviously the impact is somewhat reduced when looking at an image for the second time. So yes, posting the same thing twice could be seen as an easy perhaps even lazy option. schmee I think you are right when you say that it is somewhat counter to the point of weeklyshot. IMHO, one of the main goals of weeklyshot is to challenge us to find new perspectives on things and look at objects or concepts in a new light etc etc. So using the same image twice is totally counter to that goal.

Then again I think that weeklyshot is theme driven so if you have a shot that has been used before whether here or somewhere else, but totally fits the theme then why not submit it? Flatline's examples for Geometric Figures and Lines both fit the themes perfectly as do Montage's as mentioned by King above. schmee's submission for Urban Decay - http://www.weeklyshot.org/theme/urban-decay/response/53/ would equally if not better fit The End theme (this is one of my favourite WS submissions ever by the way) so I think that as long as it fits the theme it is good to go. Perhaps an easy option without much effort but ok anyway.

schmee also raises a good point about honest critical feedback and after having already received feedback for a shot why post again? Honestly schmee I can't disagree with you at all on this point. I had not really thought of it this way :)

But as far as this particular image goes the feedback on Night theme had some comments about sharpness, bluriness etc. Before posting this version I worked on fixing that. Technique this time was 4.38 compared to Night theme 3.59 so I guess that there is some worth to posting an improved image.

George - Thanks.
Flatline - hey, the slogan worked for OJ right?
schmee - your website rocks! Well done.

"schmee also raises a good point about honest critical feedback and after having already received feedback for a shot why post again? Honestly schmee I can't disagree with you at all on this point."

I can. 253 days ago, skomlos posted this image to the Selective Focus theme. http://www.weeklyshot.org/theme/selective-focus/response/121/ and received some good feedback about cropping the image. 20 days ago, a new version of the same image was posted in the Looking Through theme - http://www.weeklyshot.org/theme/looking-through/response/92/.

After receiving honest, critical feedback, skomlos took that on board and improved the shot. Then said (effectively):"hey everyone, what do you think of it now?" Turns out, it's pretty much what they had in mind.

It is not likely that the group of folks who rate and comment on an image in one theme is the same group who rate and comment in a second theme, even when those themes are consecutive, but especially after some months. The fact that I've seen an image before doesn't mean that I've rated it's relevance (among the other qualitites) or commented on it.