That's actually not my intent. I'm talking about my internal debate as to whether the image would be better served with a different composition. I'm asking for comments for my education and offering my view for counterpoints. I believe this is the point of posting the pictures here. Without 2 way dialog from the artist I'm not sure why he/she would need to post here.
With that said, I did get some very helpful comments that I will use going foward.
The view offered is just my view. I understand your "internal debate." I have them frequently. My view is if the debate is in deed internal, keep it that way. Comments on prints for critique can be a very powerful education tool. I guess it's the counterpoint that I don't care about. Not in any egotistical manner. I don't attend critiques to get explanations from the photographer about why I am wrong. (And I may well be from the photographer's point.)
But crit time is the time for the print to take responsibility for what it is. At some point, the photograph will be on its own - no friend to defend or explain it. It will just hang there on its own merits, people will view it and move on. (Could be in a book, a magazine, on the web, almost anywhere.)
I don't think that for educational purposes, the photographer needs to participate, unless the critique is also intended to educate the critic about this photographer's work. The photographer can put up an image for critique, get comments, and do what needs to be done without explaining why the image is as it is. The critic can see what it is.
My question to you would be - did your explanations to the people offering comments educate you? Or were they intended to educate the person offering a differing opinion?
My point still is, I look at a landscape and form an opinion, alone with the image. I really don't care that the image is blurred because it was 10 degrees, the wind was blowing 50 mph, and the photographer didn't use a tripod becasue it broke yesterday. I either like the image as-is (blurry) or not. I may appreciate the effort put into the piece, but it doesn't change the result.
Comment: "Should have used a good tripod."
Response: "I have one, usually use it, but it broke."
Who cares? The image is blurry. Now the photographer may still like the image because it reminds him of some moment, but the viewer cannot (may not even want to) join him. The piece may even evoke a memory in me of the time when ..., but again, who besides me cares? ("The blur reminds me of the time my tripod broke.") The image is still hanging there alone and blurry.
Comment: "The image isn't sharp and the contrast is low."
Response: "I used a home-made pinhole camera."
Do I then say, "Oh, in that case, I love it." or "The image isn't sharp and the contrast is low."?
This is just my opinion, and not necessarily that of LL or anyone else. I hope you feel free to offer prints for crit, and participate if you wish. I have the freedon to skip any parts of the crit I don't want to attend.