blurriness in portion of art photo

[Andrew]

This hasn't been a tiresome dialogue but it is a good example of why you should give as much information as you can right up front if you want helpful input from your peers in this style of work. Not posting your photo at the start and posing visual related questions made it hard to answer as the the first couple of responders found. Had you provided the photo in your first post you may have drawn in like-minded people and you may have received some input you could work with. You may have missed some valuable suggestions from visitors who took a look the first day but now don't go past the title of the thread. Don't slink away, work with it.

[celksy]

Andrew,

No choice but to take my chances that I've missed feedback I might've had if I had posted the image a couple of days earlier..... or days or hours earlier than that. I took the image months ago, and it's taken what it's taken for me to study it, wonder about it, formulate questions, and, yes, address my silly little vanities.

On the other hand, I'm pretty confident that the feedback I've gotten (and maybe will still get-?) has been well-handled by those who return to the board and do re-read some of the forums they've posted on. And as you pointed out, it's not Mona Lisa. And it's doubtful that my career as a brilliant artist hangs in the balance. So I'm grateful with what I get.

As to my "tiresome dialogue" comment, I just meant to indicate that I hadn't intended to start a, "what is art, and what isn't art?" question with my image or my questions. Although I find that whole topic fascinating, I recognize that it inflames people and tends to polarize quickly.

I do so appreciate how helpful you've been and I am flattered by your interest. Cheers!