Winners of the January "Cold" contest

Couldn't agree with you more on 1 and 2 - That barn and house just chill me to the bone to look at them.

Great choice, congrats!!!

breathtaking !

I'm disappointed at the choice for #2. The whole selective coloring is a cliche photographically speaking, and the composition is nothing great either. There were plenty of better choices than this one.

In addition to John's comment on the winner's fine balanced composition, I also like the fence posts in the foreground. They break the monotony of the vast area of snow, lead the viewers' sight to the buildings and hills, and block the sight from falling off the bottom edge. If the four vignetting corners are intentionally put there, they can be done better. A little softer along the vertical and a little more along the horizontal edges. To me, they appear to be unintentional, and caused by a poor lens hood and/or a thick lens filter.

Like Pete, I do not find the runner-up image's composition that interesting. The title mentioned "shoveling", but there is no hint of it in the image. The green in the scarf is way too glaring and saturated to my eyes. Perhaps a different and less saturated color can work better.

"New Year's Year" is my favorite of all. "A frozen lake" and "Cold feet" are also fine, but with some technical blemishes. All three, of course, tell stories.

#1 Great; #3 Okay; #2 Don't get it.

I agree with Jim.

Echoing Pete's and Jim's thoughts here.

I was in the 'Final 50' so I guess I get to make a comment ... I loved #2 - that should have been the winner. #1 was was terrific and would have been my # 2 choice but ... #3, sorry ... there were lots of better photos - the ice coated basketball net was a favorite.

#1: This is a great shot. Good choice.

#2: This is is Photoshopping, it is digital imaging, but not photography. The subject is dead center, just poorly composed, and it doesn't hold my interest anywhere in the frame. If this is a creative digital imaging contest I can see this image doing well, but for a photography contest... I simply don't get it at all.

#3: Meh.

i do agree with all the comments - but then again, the one thing that sucks about contests, esp ones that are being judged more on theme fitting than photographic talent, is that photography is subjective...

...oh and i disagree with you doug - if you've ever worked in a dark room or learned about some famous old school photographers, they all used tricks to make their pictures better or overlapping images to make 1...i think editing in PS is just as much an art as photography - you think professional photographers take sooc pictures and hand them to clients? noooo way - youd be shocked at what their sooc pics looked like...but i do agree that selective coloring is super tacky yuck yuck

So let's review, the editors of this contest whittled down a large field of submissions into 50 photographs, and then the public was allowed to vote on which 3 photographs we felt best evoked cold. That was it. I didn't give a crap about "digital imaging" or its composition, I cared that the 3 photos I chose, one of which being #2, made me think of cold, and not, wow how pretty, that would look great in the bathroom of my cabin on Lake Winnipesaukee. As for the title, the title didn't pop up in the voting, the photos were chosen by their quality not their designation. Perhaps the photographer's title refers to the sense of humor the photographer possesses and that Jim, hmhm, Pete and fairnsquare seem to lack, preferring the sanctuary of pretension.

Photography is subjective, very true, Cait, but #2 isn't about photography, it is all about digital imagery and post-manipulation. I am really disappointed with the judging here with this choice. #1 is fantastic, I love it. It belongs in the #1 slot. #3 does nothing for me, but at least it is photography!

Dugmar (#9, honorable mention for January)

I throw in with Pete and Jim. "Vermont" is in a class by itself. Thanks for letting me download it; I'll look at it in mid-July and get comfortable.

Great choice!!

Question: Have both winners in December and January been black and white with either a red or infrared filter, either on the camera or in post processing?

Perhaps this is something we all need to keep in mind for our Black and White entries this month?

Critiquing a photo is indeed subjective, especially about its esthetic and intent. Disagreements should therefore be expected, by both the photographers and the critics. Slamming a critic simply because you do not agree with him/her is poor form.

When possible, I would explain why I like or dislike a photo, followed with suggestions for improvement. Both of these will allow a photographer see how others view his/her work, and reflect upon them. Accolades and criticisms without either may please or annoy a photographer, but will not help his/her development.

Unlike other contests and competitions, Raw offers critiques on the winners by the judges, and let others chime in. The photographers should gain the most from them, and not from the ribbons or prizes. Let's remain subjective with our critiques, clear with our reasoning, generous with our suggestions, and civil.

Photography has always had it's fair share of "post-production". To say that #2 is "all about" photoshop is a pretty ignorant statement. If you want to see 'all about photoshop", go to a photoshop magazine. Then you tell me how this tacky green scarf is ALL ABOUT PHOTOSHOP.

By the way #1 is really good. I'd love to own it..

the first one is very nice, I agree!
but personally I'm not a fan of the whole "color selection" thing, but hey, that's just me... the third one is nice, but being the nonspecialist that I am, I have a hard time seeing how it's different from the other "plants covered in ice" ones. congrats to the winners!