Thanks, Heath.
I found this while trolling my archives. I had forgotten about it.

These are the hands of Mike Wilson, U.S.A. Olympic Gymnastics Team, 1980. Most of you will probably not remember that 1980 is the year the U.S. boycotted the Olympic Games as they were held in Moscow, so our team was not able to compete. They were very disappointed.

This photograph was taken as part of a montage (sorry) of images used on the cover of a catalog of gymnastics clothing and accessories.

Would you be more specific about the halos? My Hasselblad lenses were so sharp that I sometimes used softening filters to degrade the image slightly when working with people, and maybe you are seeing the effect of that filter. This image is a bit soft.

These days, with Photoshop, I think I would rarely degrade an image before the light passes through the lens.

Thanks, Heath.
I found this while trolling my archives. I had forgotten about it.

These are the hands of Mike Wilson, U.S.A. Olympic Gymnastics Team, 1980. Most of you will probably not remember that 1980 is the year the U.S. boycotted the Olympic Games as they were held in Moscow, so our team was not able to compete. They were very disappointed.

This photograph was taken as part of a montage (sorry) of images used on the cover of a catalog of gymnastics clothing and accessories.

Would you be more specific about the halos? My Hasselblad lenses were so sharp that I sometimes used softening filters to degrade the image slightly when working with people, and maybe you are seeing the effect of that filter. This image is a bit soft.

These days, with Photoshop, I think I would rarely degrade an image before the light passes through the lens.

Tanja...thanks!

ChriZ...thanks!

George, thanks. How did you guess 1980?
Can you tell me what was the foot-in-mouth event?

This is posed, of course. This was taken in a gymnastics gymnasium, where all the equipment was ready. I worked most of the day with Mike, going from one apparatus to another: rings, pommel horse, parallel bars, horizontal bar, vaulting horse and floor exercise. I had rented a heavy black theatrical drop, about 30 feet square, which I hung from the gymnasium rafters at a good distance in the background and moved from time to time to isolate the gymnastics equipment or area he was working in. I lit every scene with my own electronic flash units, of which I owned a large number--I am so glad to be rid of that burden. Owning nothing is a great relief.

George...I found it. Where you said, "Boy, I feel like a maroon." What's a maroon?

maroon = moron but maybe in the way bugs bunny would say it.

Tracy, thanks!

Congrats on the feature King. It may be worse on my crappily set-up laptop screen, but the 'halos' I was referring to are the brighter areas around the hands - most notably the top and right of the top hand and around the tips of the fingers of the bottom hand. I think it's probably a combination of the lighting and the softening filter, and not halos in the digital processing sense like in this example - http://www.heathcarney.com/montage/index.php?showimage=337.

"I lit every scene with my own electronic flash units, of which I owned a large number--I am so glad to be rid of that burden. Owning nothing is a great relief."
If by any chance you'll be owning a Hasselblad or any other photographic gear, then I'll be happy to take the burden for ya! I'm a good friend I know, I'd really do this for you...

Congrats on another feature King, how bout writing a little letter to the "book of records"? The man with the longest Weeklyshot-Star-Street!

"It may be worse on my crappily set-up laptop screen"

I just checked on another screen, and I was right. They're hardly visible at all on this screen.

Clearly this is just another non-relevant, poorly composed low quality image from a pretty average photographer :)
Seriously, 18 features in a row! You only need 2 more stars and you have Hawaii and Alaska!
Fair to say that the people who play along here at Weeklyshot are of a pretty high level. There is a handful of photographers who are a in a class of their own (gorin, vernon etc) and King, you are leading that pack by a long way. Each week I look forward to seeing what King is going to submit.
I can tell everyone that no cash has changed hands for this comment :) but anytime you want to tell me how I can improve, your comments will be welcome.

King, congratulations on a really wonderful image.

I was pretty sure that this was a commercial
quality image.After reading your explanation,I see that my assesment was correct.
Thanks for sharing your work and stories
of it.

Thanks, everyone.

I've noticed something that seems to be true for many WeeklyShot contributors, including myself. We begin our participation not knowing how we are going to get knocked about the the raters and the commenters. We gain new insight on how our images and our theme interpretations are perceived by that small group of "others," the W.S. membership.

In my particular case, I discovered "digital noise" in my own images, which I previusly didn't know how to see and identify--as opposed to grain, on which I'm fairly expert.

Second, I learned that most of the other contributors weren't here to dabble, as I was, but to contribute their best work--and much of that work was outstanding--and to encourage and push each other to improve. How great!

So as I learned the nuances, politics and personality of the W.S. participants, my images and contributions were being slowly, incrementally shaped to receive broader approval. Sociologists call this "Social Control."

Take a look a broad selection of user pages and see if you agree. The most common scenario (there are notable exceptions) is : no featured images, occasional featured images, regular featured images.

Sometimes intelligence is defined as the ability to do well on intelligence tests. By analogy, a featured image is one that gets high ratings. I (and several others) seem to frequently submit images that raters rate highly enough to result in featured status.

I'm not putting myself down, and I appreciate the Features. It's just an observation. Am I right?

Interesting thoughts and I largely agree with you. I guess that as you point out, you are one of a few exceptions around here in that you are here to "dabble".
Obviously if you were taking shots like this 27 years ago it is fair to say that you have been at this photography caper for a while and have a better idea on most aspects of photography than the large majority of us.
Whether you are actively pursuing "social control" to gain more featured images doesn't really matter as far as I am concerned. I guess this is true for some.
I guess those that are generating more features as the weeks progress are understanding to a greater extent the dynamics of WS as well as improving with their work. I feel that participating on WS has helped me improve greatly as I am sure it has for many other members.
Your analogy on the featured image is obviously correct. Higher scores = more features. Understanding what generates higher scores = more features. In the absence of any other measure, you still have to be very good at what you do to consistently generate featured images. Doesn't matter if the shot was taken 27 yrs ago or yesterday.
Oh, looks like you got Alaska overnight only have Hawaii to go :)

BTW if anyone can make any sense of what I just wrote could you please contact me and explain it to me.

Lemmingstone,

Your comment makes perfect sense to me.

I'm no longer here to dabble, as I found that dabbling is not appreciated.

Social Control as I defined it above is out of the awareness of those who are being controlled. Their behavior changes, but that may not be aware of any conscious decisions why they changed the undesirable (to others) behavior. I don't actively pursue social control, but I'm pretty sure that I respond to it, all the same.

There is another way to look at it, which psychologists call knowledge of results. If you put a blindfold on an expert archer, she might be able to shoot in the general direction of the target, but without feedback, her aim will not improve except by chance. But with feedback (your last shot was too low, etc.) her aim will be incrementally shaped to get closer to the bullseye. That's the way I'm using the term social control.

I guess knowledge of results is a more appropriate term. Raters and commenters nudge our photographs in the right direction to get featured after a number of attempts.

Bottom line: I'm here to be challenged and to learn. Just because I have a lot of experience and am a senior citizen doesn't mean that I have given up on the desire to learn and grow, or that producing a quality image no longer pleases me.

Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

Others may not, but I find this discussion rather interesting.

WS is to a degree just like any other community, virtual or physical. In any community people can alter behaviour to appear more acceptable etc.

Here at WS the same thing can apply as you point out. Incidently another WS member raised your/this very point with me the other day - ie what it takes to get featured. Have to say that this awareness is working for them in a big way.

I agree also with your comment: "The most common scenario (there are notable exceptions) is : no featured images, occasional featured images, regular featured images." That certainly seems to happen a lot.

In any event, I think that one of the best things about WS is the push/challenge each week brings. This is so regardless of experience. I find it interesting to read that you are only a recent convert to digital. I guess (having never used film) that you would need to disgard 50% of what you know and start again.

Anyway, it would be good to know what others think. I guess I could explore it in the google group. Thanks King.

Lemmingstone,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. As *very few* W.S. members participate in the W.S. Google group, I use this "forum" when I wish to address the broader membership.

My intention was to encourage younger and newer W.S. members who don't have any, or have few, featured images. I know of one W.S. member who is likely to find this approach patronizing, condescending and pretentious. I certainly don't mean to be. I'm open to helping and supporting anybody who wants help, advice or support.

Great!