After offering critiique on other poster's work, I have been invited to offer some of my own photos. These are all from 35mm transparencies double scanned using an opticfilm 7300, and cropped using adobe photodeluxe. The original filmstock was a mixture of fuji velvia and k/chrome 64/200.

http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss308/corkneyfonz/yestyouthedited72dpijpeg.jpg

http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss308/corkneyfonz/wheeljpeg72dpiedited.jpg

http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss308/corkneyfonz/waleseditedjpeg72dpi.jpg
http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss308/corkneyfonz/sanysammyforweb.jpg

http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss308/corkneyfonz/reflectdistforweb.jpg

http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss308/corkneyfonz/nighthawkieditedjpeg72dpi.jpg

1. A little too tightly cropped for me... I find where some of the details meet the edge of the frame a little distracting. i.e. the car name and where to lights (chrome) meet the edges. The people almost become an after thought. I find myself trying to figure out what was meant to be the focus of the picture... the car? the people? the name badge.

2. Nice idea but he lines on the shot (in the alloy) don't really go anywhere. I guess overall the picture come across quite "flat"... it doesn't appear to have any real depth to it if that makes any sense. Maybe a different angle would have added more interest.

3. I quite like this one but I think the horizon is not quite level and the forground rocks are just a tad distracting in the highlights region.

4. Not my cup of tea this shot.

5. Interesting pattern... what is it? It doesn't do too much for me though. It looks like a person by a fence which has been heavily photoshopped.

6. The best pic you posted. Would like to have seen a touchmore detail on the plumage.

Overall not bad... I do find the composition a touch off. I'm not sure whether is has some from the scnning but the pics are all a little dull colour wise.

On a seperate note I find the comments that you made about astraman's work amazing given your own cropping / composition.

Thank you for your comments. Picture one has been accepted in photographic exhibitions up and down the UK under the title, "Yesterday's Youth" which may help you understand the composition and point of the photo even if you still dislike it.
No2, is a reflection taken on a car lot under artificial light. The original picture is green. I agree with your comments although I just included this as an example for Astraman to pursue and improve on. I have never rated this photo.
No3 is still a work in progress, the silverfast software supplied with my scanner threw a wobbly distorting what was a very cold picture into an overexposed mess with a splendid radioactive yellow glow. So much time was expended in trying to produce a half decent exposure in photodeluxe that by the time I'd spotted the slightly askew horizon, I'd lost the will to live.
No4 shot at 1/30sec its an example of what to throw away except that they were family.
No5 I've included an obviously doctored reflection to see peoples reaction. This is a duplicate slide taken through one of the old textured driving licence holders. We had it tough when I was a lad.
No6 The Kestrel was taken with fill in flash at something like 1/250sec at f22. This has had sucess in competitions although I thought the fill in flash to be slightly harsh, hence the attempt to make the picture a little more natural.
No7 There is also a picture of a zebra in the "you can now insert pictures " thread. This made it in to the finals of a monthly camera magazine competition.
If my slides are scanned at the maximum, I have files in excess of 300mb.These photos are at just 72dpi. compressed. Digital cameras rule, long live Astraman.

Now I am back in the country and recovered from jetlag, I will offer my comments.

Since you have already decided (on the basis of 1 photo) that I am technically incompetent, I will not attempt to judge these photos on technical merit. I shall judge them simply on how they appeal visually to me.

1/ Too dark (might be my screen) and looks like a very cliched poster AD for a Ford Consul.

2/ I don't rate this picture either. You have posted it for me to "pursue and improve upon". How can I improve on an already PERFECTLY boring shot?

3/ It's got potential, but the sky looks bland and the foreground rocks look as though they have been cut from another picture and crudely glued on.

4/ What the ***?

5/ Interesting if you like abstracts.

6/ The best of the bunch. However, the fill in flash makes the falcon look a little artificial.

As to your comment "Digital cameras rule, long live Astraman.", what are you trying to say?

Thankyou for your comments, Astraman. I accept that I rather unfairly judged you on just one shot (but it could've been the winning one). Of your recent flower shots, I described one as having "quality written all over it" and a few birds as being " a very good set of photos". All of the 7 photos that I have posted were scanned and edited in one day including uploading to photobucket. The 3rd photo was originally a very cold sunrise. A polarising filter reduced the reflections of the foreground rocks but if your peer hard enough they' continue under the water line. After seeing your bird photos, I would certainly buy your Canon as it handles highlights and shadows in a way superior to film. My only reservation is the dust problem which I understand software eliminates.