Aha! Philippe! I'm maybe putting two and two together. Did you initially not want to rate Owen's NATURAL image to be transparent and unbiased since you had already seen it, but then couldn't wait any longer to have no more red "Rate Me" before uploading your own shot, so you went back and rated his? No worries, mate. Now if you'll do me the kind favor of going back to my shot (#111) and leave a comment? I would really appreciate your feedback.

Thanks, George, very interesting remarks.

As for rating Owen's natural, I didn't rate it because I wanted to post my picture, but because I wanted to let him know that I was trying to be honnest, despite the fact that I din't like some of his comments. I finally rated 3 all the way, which is what I sometimes do when I'm not too fond of a picture.

As for the book: it's a book about artists using photography. Very trendy and very snobish :O)))
I didn't have anything in mind when I made this pic last week (this explains why I'm not an artist). The book just happened to be there, under a nice light and I thought it was funny with the glasses on it. I almost posted it for "looking through"...

Now I'm going to have a look at your post.

Thank you, Thelma, you make my day.

And I didn't even know it was Philippe... ;)

ah...poet!

Philippe,
You say, "I didn't have anything in mind when I made this pic last week (this explains why I'm not an artist)." Where I went to art school (Southern Methodist University), one cannot call oneself an artist if one *does* have anything in mind (which is to say, has an expectation of a certain outcome).

I consider you to be an artist.

Thank you, King, I feel flattered.

Special thanks to Owen. :O)))

Maybe this is a teaching: we can always find an agreement in the end...

King, I said this because the content of this book is 100% conceptual photography. You can hardly appreciate a picture for itself, you have to know what the artist had in mind (his approach) before watching the picture. While I shoot everything I can and, sometimes, I'm lucky.
For me, Thelma is an artist (and I hold artists in high consideration). She has to do nothing special, she has a creative mind.
But I thank you for your comments, before it leave me some hope... :O))

er... I mean "because".

groen65: honestly, I can't say I would be unhappy to be in such a book, even if I can be very critic about some works. But I have the feeling I'm not in the same playground...

... and I think most of the pictures from this book wouldn't have the slightest chance to get featured on WS...

My wife thinks the most interesting part of this book is its cover. :O))) (I like this).

I would NOT have guessed you, mon ami. Alor, bien fait. Tu as reussi de faire quelquechose de différent.

Merci, Andrew.

Ok, now I am the boob - I too just jumped to the conclusion that this was the Periodic table of elements, but unlike George didn't look any closer. Oh well.

Craig, do you still find the glasses unappropriated?

:O)

Don't change a bit ;O)