Thank you, CushmoK. This is one of my favorite singers. He is a street singer in Buenos Aires, and a friend. To hear just a small sample of his remarkable voice, recorded as I took this photo, go here:

http://www.kingdouglas.com/BuenosAires/Claudio/CambiaExcerpt.mp3

I post few comments... nearly each time it is for one of your photo !

That makes me happy!

Well what do you know, it's the old man! Great job my friend!

Pursang,
Thank you, master. FYI, this is full frame...that is, not cropped at all.

The grunge is added for effect and is appropriate to the scene--believe me, it's appropriate.

Pete, thanks. Here's the back story. Claudio is sitting in the doorway of a storefront--a shoe store--in Buenos Aires. I wanted to get a close-up of his face while minimizing all the shoes on display in the window.

I have other photos with the entire guitar, which features a prominent cutout of Che Guevarra. This is the best shot of Claudio, though.

ah ok.. i did wonder if external factors influenced your cropping decision..

anyway.. great shot :)

This one deserves the front page for sure.

Mark,
Thanks for your (IMHO) enlightened point of view.

I knew when I posted this that ratings would be polarized and that some folks would gig me on image quality. However, I like the image and decided to post it with little liklihood that it would be featured. With 13 ratings:

* Relevance: 4.00
* Impact: 3.62
* Composition: 3.54
* Technique: 3.46
* Quality: 2.85
* Overall: 3.494

pete,
Also, like Mark (pursang), I dislike using flash with street photography. This was a night shot, hand-held, using a primitive (by current standards) point-and-shoot. Claudio tends to move a lot when he sings. Given all that, this is an acceptable image. The original isn't nearly this "noisy." I included a texture layer to increase the "grunge" look that I think works well here.

Thanks again for your comments and support.

Folks:

Hypothesis: Once an image falls out of the "Rate Me" category, it stands less chance of being noticed by passers-by. If the thumbnail stands out, it stands a better chance.

Hypothesis, contd:
Some images that are not featured with 13 ratings, may get featured if additional WS members take the time to rate the image.

Hypothesis, contd:
In attention to being in the "Rate Me" category, or having an attention-grabbing thumbnail image, sometimes an image with a large number of comments will pique the interest of browsing raters.

Hypothesis, contd:
This image is languishing because it is no longer in the "Rate Me" category, and the thumbnail is not adequate to attract much attention. However, the three people who have bothered to comment seem to like it okay.

Hypothesis, contd:
The ratio of comments to raters is low (3:13) but the ratings, except for Quality, are not bad. It's possible that with more raters, the overall rating my rise.

Hypothesis, contd:
If the overall rating rises more than 0.15 points, this image stands a chance of being featured.

Hypothesis, contd:
Therefore, attracting more raters would be a good thing. With 13 raters, this image has no chance to be featured. With more raters (preferably those who might like this image), this image may stand some small chance to be featured.

Hypothesis, contd:

If I bait the thumbnail of this image with supernumerary comments, perhaps some rater will be drifting by, see the greater than average number of comments and move in for a closer look.

Hypothesis, contd:

This will infuriate some members of W.S., who will think this is immoral, unfair, and demonstrates a total lack of integrity on my part.

Hypothesis, contd:

Been there, done that.

Hypothesis, contd:

So I apologize in advance, as if that will do any good.

Hypothesis:

Perhaps some of those who get angry with me will post comments here, thus improving my chance of attracting raters.

Conclusion #1:

This is an experiment. I could simply post another image of higher quality, or screw around experimenting in this fashion. It's a rainy morning and I've decided to experiment.

Stay tuned. I'll report the results at the end of the theme.

Oh, and feel free to throw flowers or bricks. Everything will help.

I see that my image #53 is the current leader in legitimate comments with 27.

This should make #27 for this un-featured image, including 15 supernumerary comments by me.

Has anyone noticed that with fewer participating members these days that the average number of comments has also declined?

We used to have at least one image per theme with about three dozen comments. Ah, the good old days.

Vernon Trent (among potential others that I haven't heard about) once had an image featured with no comments whatsoever.

Vernon is an interesting guy, isn't he.

Vernon and I have communicated via e-mail and I hope to meet him in person someday.

Some interesting W.S. members whom I've met in person:
George Illes, in Costa Mesa and San Francisco
Jarrett Gorin (gorin-images), in Costa Mesa and San Francisco
Mark Kitaoka (pursang), in San Francisco
ChriZ (Christopher Scott, in Prague)

W.S. members with whom I have shared e-mails (in alphabetical order by first name):

Ana

Anna

Andrew (psychodudu)

Andrew Klimin

Antonio

Baris

Brandon

Brant

Carl

Christopher

Dan

Debora

Eduardo

Emily

Flatline (real name withheld)

George

Jack

Jarrett

Jason

Joe

Manuel

Mark

Marty

Matt

Michael

Nynke

Phil

Philippe

Roberta

Rusty

Stephan

Tobias (Mooch)

Tracy

Vernon

Did I overlook anyone?

Okay, everyone be quiet and hold real still. Let's see if I can get a nibble.
Sunday, 10:31 Central Daylight Time, U.S.A.

Ah King you are very funny, and I can't believe that I am the only one so far to comment on the 67, now 68, comments. Are you having a bad day?

Where the hell is Blizzard when you need her. BTW both Mark and I sent her invites to WS just for shits and giggles. ;-)))

OK King, where did you go?

Left the bait on the hook and went to a movie. You left three comments, Tracy. What a pal!

Thanks for being honest in your ratings.

You can't count. :)

Okay, okay...five!

King, STOP IT right now.

Mark,

I STOPPED already!

Folks,
Well, my experiment worked. I didn't tell anybody that this was my photo, but I got three more ratings today, putting this image at:

* Relevance: 4.19
* Impact: 3.81
* Composition: 3.75
* Technique: 3.69
* Quality: 3.19
* Overall: 3.726

The strange thing is that of the three additional raters, only Tracy bothered to leave a comment. I'm actually surprised that the Quality rating finally creeped above 3.

oh my god! haha, It's past midnight here, everything is quiet, except for me who's rolling on the floor laughing! Great King!
It's not really my type of image, but since it's not post processed to achieve that effect it works okay for me! You definitely captured the mood though!
Still, your comments made my day!
Cheers...

Is 79 comments a record. I have never seen that many on any image before.

Great idea, King. Maybe you could rent out your commenting services to help others push their shots over the line. My #62 is quite close to being featured ;)

ChriZ, glad you got a laugh out of it.

Tom, I think I hold the record at 114 legitimate comments on a controversial image, which I don't want to bring up here.

Montage, That's quite naughty of you. I'll go vote right now.

Montage,
I see that I have already rated your #62, which is stuck at 13 raters, just as this one was.

How much do you think I could charge for my W.S. Commenting Service?...ten cents per comment and a little more for those that are actually pertinent to the image? I already have a PayPal account.

I tried this once..the comment thing.
No one noticed.
:P

Ana,
You mean you tried charging for comments? :>)

No, I mean I tried to make a grazillion comments on one of my shots to see if a lot of comments would strike interest.
It didn't.
:)

...a grazillion. Is that more than or less than 67? It would have caught my attention, I promise.

Well, nobody noticed, so I guess the number doesn't matter!!

:)

I'd comment on this now, but I can't stop laughing at all of your comments King.