Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

DogShow - This is not a fake - Help Critique Please

Versions (Variants)Version Help

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Add Comment

HI Everyone

I was quite upset on the weekend when someone took a copy of this image (that was cropped further by the person who purchased it from me), after it was placed on an Afghan Dog site. They claimed that it was "fraud" on the dog and said that the entire dog has been photoshopped. Shaving, painting on of hair, extending out the hocks (back legs somewhere).

I want to know what people think of this and WHY someone would say it is fake? He really went to town on me and was quite nasty, even telling me to bring the original to court, saying because it was fake he could say pretty much anything he wanted about me.

Details:
I processed the RAW file in lightroom. I couldn't add the screen shots as they aren't jogs Sad But if you want to see more I have an album here https://www.facebook.com/cworkmanphilpott/media_set?set=a.10202466954505146.1073...


I will also add what they said. They claim the following supposedly obvious frauds as:
* the handlers right foot is missing (it is actually behind the dog)
* the dog has a blue topknot that shows it has been tampered with (so does the judge, it was twilight and the spotlights are turning on)
* the light is behind the subjects and so the shadows are wrong (we have more than one light at showgrounds, the one I am using as my source is behind me)
* the saddle of the dog has been shaved (nope, I didn't and don't really know what that means but I am guessing it is the spine area)
* the hocks have been extended out (nope)
* the hair on the underside of the dog has been painted on in a different colour (the dog's hair is actually multicoloured, called a brindle in this breed)



Just want some feedback and what do people think of my image. I have only been photographing for 3 months and am always keen to learn and improve. This one really had me questioning if I really should be doing this.

Thank you everyone. I always get such great help from this community on my images. I'm not sure if I should quit this or keep going.
Carol

Brand:Canon
Camera:Canon EOS 5D MkIII
Lens:EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Recording media:JPEG (digital)
Date Taken:29 Sep 2013 - 6:09 PM
Focal Length:70mm
Lens Max Aperture:f/2.8
Aperture:f/6.3
Shutter Speed:1/20sec
Exposure Comp:+1
ISO:3200
Exposure Mode:Aperture-priority AE
Metering Mode:Multi-segment
Flash:Off, Did not fire
White Balance:Manual
Title:DogShow - This is not a fake - Help Critique Please
Username:cazozphil cazozphil
Uploaded:4 Nov 2013 - 7:59 AM
Tags:Afghan Dogs, Dogshow, Pets / captive animals, Photo with the Judge, Winning Dog
VS Mode Rating 96 (18.18% won)
These stats show the percentage of wins and the rating score that your photo has achieved. You can go to the VS Mode by clicking on this icon.

Signup to e2

Signup to e2 to see which photo this has won or lost against in the vs mode
Votes:Voting Disabled
Critque wantedCritique Wanted
Has Modifications Modifications Welcome (Upload a Modification)
Variant - TestsVariant - Tests
Awards have been disabled on this photo

Comments

This photo is here for critique. Please only comment constructively and with suggestions on how to improve it.
mrswoolybill
mrswoolybill Critique Team 7394 forum postsmrswoolybill vcard United Kingdom967 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 9:06 AMConstructive Critique!This comment was flagged as constructive critique! 

Carol, what a horrible experience, I really feel for you. I don't do dog shows but I do photograph a lot of events. There's so much difference between art photography, where it is assumed that an image will have been enhanced beyond recognition from the original; and photo journalism (which is how I would categorise this), where truth actually matters.

So far as this man's arguments are concerned:

*I can see a full quota of human feet, there is absolutely no issue there.
*The hints of blue are down to white balance not coping perfectly once artificial light gained importance. Your answer is amply substantiated by blue tones creeping into the background, look in particular at the area around the handler's outstretched arm. Also on the white canvas and railing, down the side of the handler's trouser-leg. I see that this was taken 6.09pm in September, daylight would have been dominant up to shortly beforehand, mixed light sources are always awkward. This is the point where I tend now to think 'I'm using RAW, I'll sort this out later...'
*It is perfectly obvious that there is a strong light source behind you - look at the highlight on the handler's forehead!
*Re the saddle - no I don't understand what he is on about either!
*The hocks. Now here I can see how someone could look at this and wonder if the coat had been extended downwards by cloning, because the streaks are so smooth and straight. This is down to the owner's meticulous grooming and preparation. I can actually see one area that looks at first sight like the pattern repeats that one would expect if the image had been doctored. But on closer inspection, even at this relatively low resolution, I can easily see breaks in pattern. I hope that the owner is aware of these allegations, I'll return to that in a moment.
*Re the underside - the dog is quite obviously a brindle. End of story.

The Critique Gallery isn't really the place to make suggestions as to what you can actually do, though a question in the Forums might (or might not... ) elicit practical advice. I will just say: As this man obviously knows, legal action is expensive, risky, and you're not going to risk it. But do consider where and how these allegations have been made - just to your face or in print, on a website? If the latter, I would suggest that you contact editors and point out the seriousness of what has been said. You could suggest that an impartial third party check out your original file. I hope you have the original RAW file by the way, preferably still on your memory card.

There is one other aspect, and that is the reputation of the dog's owner. Are they aware of this? A professional breeder, with a reputation to protect, might be in a better position to put pressure on the man for a full apology.

I don't know if any of this helps. I can understand how hurt and angry you must feel. I hope that you get some sort of resolution.
Moira

Last Modified By mrswoolybill at 4 Nov 2013 - 9:11 AM

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

mrswoolybill
mrswoolybill Critique Team 7394 forum postsmrswoolybill vcard United Kingdom967 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 9:23 AM

PS I should have added - it's a really attractive picture, I like the fact that you have stooped down a bit to the dog's level, making it the star of the picture. I hope that this won't discourage you from doing more.
Moira

Last Modified By mrswoolybill at 4 Nov 2013 - 9:23 AM

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

Lynniesefforts
Lynniesefforts e2 Member 3Lynniesefforts vcard Australia
4 Nov 2013 - 9:26 AM

So well said Moira, I know Carol personally and she has been very upset by this other ningnong's accusations...GrinGrin

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

paulbroad
paulbroad  681 forum posts United Kingdom842 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 9:30 AMConstructive Critique!This comment was flagged as constructive critique! 

Just ignore them. You are putting yourself in the firing line by being 'professional'. It is likely to be another photographer who sees you as a treat. I've seen this type of thing many times. I've been reported to the tax office by so called professionals, but always declared earnings totally.

You must take the flack, or stop trying to be a pro.

Let me add a bit more though. You have super gear, a pro looking logo and yet you say you have only 3 months experience. Does this mean serious experience with 'good' equipment, because if it does, I would gain some more experience before trying to offer yourself as a pro. This is going to sound harsh, but your image is not really to a professional standard. The dog is not sharp, and you should never have been using ISO3200. I cannot actually understand your EXIF data. Just doesn't seem right. There was plenty of sun.

It also looks like you used a flash fill. You do not say so, but there is a flare spot on the chap's head. The wrong side for the sun. ISO 200, 400 as a max. Flashfill and careful focusing.

The high ISO will effect detail, even on that camera. Your choice of position is unfortunate with that direct sun. You may not have been able to move them,but you could have moved enough to hide the sun and avoid flare. Ideally, you should pose such groups to optimise lighting and an uncluttered background.

So, ignore the idiot. Someone is trying to rattle you.

But practice, master your craft. It is too easy these days to buy a top camera and think that is all youneed to be a great photographer.

Experience is all.

Practice and you will do it if you really want.

Paul

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

cazozphil
cazozphil e2 Member 1cazozphil vcard
4 Nov 2013 - 9:51 AM

HI Paul, thank you.

It was actually 6pm at night when this was taken and it wasn't daylight saving back then, the sun had already set. I didn't use a flash. I have 3 months experience with taking dog pictures and actually getting some serious photo time in on using the camera settings and learning what they mean, rather than just being a happy snapper shooting on auto (which I have done even with my canon 60D). I have only had this camera for about 2 months or so, so I'm still learning it.

I think ISO 200, 400 would have been too slow if the dog moved, I had been shooting on around 100-200 earlier during the day. I have some test shots prior to taking this one and the motion blur made me up the ISO as I didn't have a flash. I know it looks like there is alot of sun but there actually wasn't it was getting dark. The flare might be from the spotlight that is on the pole behind me?

Thank you, I am out most days taking photos to practice and I take all different kinds of photos on different setting to learn from. I am hoping next year to be able to do some courses in photography. Now I have just been reading books, going out and practicing and if someone says something, like on the comments, and I don't understand I ask them privately or I go and google it.

thanks
Carol
---



Quote: Just ignore them. You are putting yourself in the firing line by being 'professional'. It is likely to be another photographer who sees you as a treat. I've seen this type of thing many times. I've been reported to the tax office by so called professionals, but always declared earnings totally.

You must take the flack, or stop trying to be a pro.

Let me add a bit more though. You have super gear, a pro looking logo and yet you say you have only 3 months experience. Does this mean serious experience with 'good' equipment, because if it does, I would gain some more experience before trying to offer yourself as a pro. This is going to sound harsh, but your image is not really to a professional standard. The dog is not sharp, and you should never have been using ISO3200. I cannot actually understand your EXIF data. Just doesn't seem right. There was plenty of sun.

It also looks like you used a flash fill. You do not say so, but there is a flare spot on the chap's head. The wrong side for the sun. ISO 200, 400 as a max. Flashfill and careful focusing.

The high ISO will effect detail, even on that camera. Your choice of position is unfortunate with that direct sun. You may not have been able to move them,but you could have moved enough to hide the sun and avoid flare. Ideally, you should pose such groups to optimise lighting and an uncluttered background.

So, ignore the idiot. Someone is trying to rattle you.

But practice, master your craft. It is too easy these days to buy a top camera and think that is all youneed to be a great photographer.

Experience is all.

Practice and you will do it if you really want.

Paul

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

cazozphil
cazozphil e2 Member 1cazozphil vcard
4 Nov 2013 - 9:52 AM

Sorry should add the EXIF data is straight from the image upload, I don't have to add it in as this site picks it up for me.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

cazozphil
cazozphil e2 Member 1cazozphil vcard
4 Nov 2013 - 10:04 AM

Thank you so much Moira for your feedback. I have spent hours and hours (no exaggeration, pretty much the whole weekend) going over this image and the other images from the same group win to try and find out why he would be thinking and writing the things he is. (I have put copies in the album I made up with the link above).

I did wonder about White Balance but I don't know how I would have fixed it except maybe put it on fluorescent? because of the lights coming on?

I just couldn't understand why he is singling this out, he is in america and we are in Australia, so I decided to put it on here for some help, as I haven't done any formal training in photography. He said he looked at it at a pixel level and I don't know how to do that.

I have always been told I have a good eye and about 3 months ago I decided to give it a try. I was very lucky to get to work with a dog photographer here in Australia who helps me learn the breeds and how they should be stacked but she lets me work out my camera settings myself. I have learnt what I know from practice and I join meetup groups to try and learn from others.

thanks
Carol



Quote: Carol, what a horrible experience, I really feel for you. I don't do dog shows but I do photograph a lot of events. There's so much difference between art photography, where it is assumed that an image will have been enhanced beyond recognition from the original; and photo journalism (which is how I would categorise this), where truth actually matters.

So far as this man's arguments are concerned:

*I can see a full quota of human feet, there is absolutely no issue there.
*The hints of blue are down to white balance not coping perfectly once artificial light gained importance. Your answer is amply substantiated by blue tones creeping into the background, look in particular at the area around the handler's outstretched arm. Also on the white canvas and railing, down the side of the handler's trouser-leg. I see that this was taken 6.09pm in September, daylight would have been dominant up to shortly beforehand, mixed light sources are always awkward. This is the point where I tend now to think 'I'm using RAW, I'll sort this out later...'
*It is perfectly obvious that there is a strong light source behind you - look at the highlight on the handler's forehead!
*Re the saddle - no I don't understand what he is on about either!
*The hocks. Now here I can see how someone could look at this and wonder if the coat had been extended downwards by cloning, because the streaks are so smooth and straight. This is down to the owner's meticulous grooming and preparation. I can actually see one area that looks at first sight like the pattern repeats that one would expect if the image had been doctored. But on closer inspection, even at this relatively low resolution, I can easily see breaks in pattern. I hope that the owner is aware of these allegations, I'll return to that in a moment.
*Re the underside - the dog is quite obviously a brindle. End of story.

The Critique Gallery isn't really the place to make suggestions as to what you can actually do, though a question in the Forums might (or might not... ) elicit practical advice. I will just say: As this man obviously knows, legal action is expensive, risky, and you're not going to risk it. But do consider where and how these allegations have been made - just to your face or in print, on a website? If the latter, I would suggest that you contact editors and point out the seriousness of what has been said. You could suggest that an impartial third party check out your original file. I hope you have the original RAW file by the way, preferably still on your memory card.

There is one other aspect, and that is the reputation of the dog's owner. Are they aware of this? A professional breeder, with a reputation to protect, might be in a better position to put pressure on the man for a full apology.

I don't know if any of this helps. I can understand how hurt and angry you must feel. I hope that you get some sort of resolution.
Moira

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

mrswoolybill
mrswoolybill Critique Team 7394 forum postsmrswoolybill vcard United Kingdom967 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 12:24 PM

Paul has a point in that if you are publishing pictures you do need to be reasonably thick-skinned and respond to criticism calmly, rationally. But there is no excuse for nastiness, stupidity or bullying, and there is no reason why you should just accept it. The media where this occurs have a responsibility to monitor behaviour and exercise discipline, as this site does. Have you contacted the Afghan Dog site?
If he is looking at a downloaded image I would be surprised if he is seeing it any larger than as uploaded here, ie maximum of 1000 pixels per side.
All of that is straying outside CG territory. I am busy all day today, I'm just looking in - but I'll download this later and have a go at sorting the blue cast and improving the light balance. I can see that the light was difficult, if you hand-held at 1/20 second you did well to get it this sharp!
Moira

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

mrswoolybill
mrswoolybill Critique Team 7394 forum postsmrswoolybill vcard United Kingdom967 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 1:09 PM

I've uploaded a very quick effort. I used Enhance colour> Saturation/hue, selected blues and made a few adjustments to warm the tones slightly and reduce saturation. I also added a bit of Unsharp mask. It's far from perfect but I didn't want to go too far as it reduced the impact of the rosette, and time is limited here for more fiddly work!
As I mentioned above, mixed light sources are a pain. When you open a RAW file, check out the light temperature and tint sliders that appear top right of the screen, as well as the presets for different types of lighting.

Last Modified By mrswoolybill at 4 Nov 2013 - 1:15 PM

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

paulbroad
paulbroad  681 forum posts United Kingdom842 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 5:28 PM

I see why you needed 3200. Still not good for quality, though and that is probably why the dogs hair does look very soft. There may even be some subject movement.

The more work you do and the more it is published, the more likely you are to attract idiots. You will just need to ignore them I fear. The internet is brilliant, but also not a nice place. I have nothing to do with anyof the popular social sites. Too much stupidy.

Just grit the teeth a make sure your work is A1 and that you are legal, tax, you need third party insurance, personal liability cover. If you hurt someone whilst on an assignment you can be in a lot of financial trouble.

paul

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

iancrowson
iancrowson e2 Member 4209 forum postsiancrowson vcard United Kingdom128 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 5:34 PM

The photo does not look like a fraud or fake to me. What ever you do in life there will be someone waiting to take a pot shot at you. Just ignore them and get on with what you enjoy. Also don't forget there is immense competition and jealousies in the dog showing/breeding world.
The dog's owner will be looking at how the dog is standing and arranged and will judge the photo mainly on that. On this site it is being viewed by photographers.
The image has the appearance of a snap shot and apart from the technical faults mentioned above it is spoilt by the people in the background. The man holding the dog is over lapping the man in white shirt. There are a lot of distractions behind the main subject area. If this is a shot of the couple's glory in the rink it's maybe ok, but as a dog portrait less so.
The EXIF date suggests the image was recorded in jpeg although you say the RAW image was processed in Lightroom.
All the best
Ian

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

cazozphil
cazozphil e2 Member 1cazozphil vcard
5 Nov 2013 - 11:25 AM

Hi guys thank you so much for your comments, just to let you know in this images the guy in the background is the breeder of the dog, there is another photo which is thre official judge photo Smile. Unfortunately at dog shows it is not often we can get images without people in the background although we do try to minimise the, Smile

Thank you all so much I am feeling much better and feel I have learnt some very useful tips.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

cazozphil
cazozphil e2 Member 1cazozphil vcard
6 Nov 2013 - 9:20 PM

Thank you Isn

Would it say jpg because I exported it from Lightroom and used that to upload? I'm also not sure why on my laptop they stay as cr2 files when I upload the, but on my desktop the convert to dng files on import. Have to google that. I have only just realised that it could stay as original cr2 file when I installed Lightroom onto my laptop and not convert.

Thanks for the feedback, this one is more or less a snapshot because the breeder (guy int the white shirt) wanted to get into the photo. Unfortunately at some of he shows there is not an area where you can set up so as to eliminate a busy background. This was the least busiest section of the ring Smile and as they judge a class, win, we have a minute to take the photo and then the next class is judged. Means have to be quick in the ring Smile

I'm learning and loving it. Just couldn't work out why this one was considered so bad to be a hack job photoshop. Unless as you and Moira say! they are trying to attack the owner/breeder. The attacker claims to be a well renowned dog photographer, but googling him I found nothing other than a Facebook profile... So I'm not sure what to think, if he was why couldn't he help me instead of attacking me ? Oh well, I have been buoyed by all the feedback and I do love to learn and improve.

Carol



Quote: The photo does not look like a fraud or fake to me. What ever you do in life there will be someone waiting to take a pot shot at you. Just ignore them and get on with what you enjoy. Also don't forget there is immense competition and jealousies in the dog showing/breeding world.
The dog's owner will be looking at how the dog is standing and arranged and will judge the photo mainly on that. On this site it is being viewed by photographers.
The image has the appearance of a snap shot and apart from the technical faults mentioned above it is spoilt by the people in the background. The man holding the dog is over lapping the man in white shirt. There are a lot of distractions behind the main subject area. If this is a shot of the couple's glory in the rink it's maybe ok, but as a dog portrait less so.
The EXIF date suggests the image was recorded in jpeg although you say the RAW image was processed in Lightroom.
All the best
Ian


Quote: The photo does not look like a fraud or fake to me. What ever you do in life there will be someone waiting to take a pot shot at you. Just ignore them and get on with what you enjoy. Also don't forget there is immense competition and jealousies in the dog showing/breeding world.
The dog's owner will be looking at how the dog is standing and arranged and will judge the photo mainly on that. On this site it is being viewed by photographers.
The image has the appearance of a snap shot and apart from the technical faults mentioned above it is spoilt by the people in the background. The man holding the dog is over lapping the man in white shirt. There are a lot of distractions behind the main subject area. If this is a shot of the couple's glory in the rink it's maybe ok, but as a dog portrait less so.
The EXIF date suggests the image was recorded in jpeg although you say the RAW image was processed in Lightroom.
All the best
Ian


Quote: The photo does not look like a fraud or fake to me. What ever you do in life there will be someone waiting to take a pot shot at you. Just ignore them and get on with what you enjoy. Also don't forget there is immense competition and jealousies in the dog showing/breeding world.
The dog's owner will be looking at how the dog is standing and arranged and will judge the photo mainly on that. On this site it is being viewed by photographers.
The image has the appearance of a snap shot and apart from the technical faults mentioned above it is spoilt by the people in the background. The man holding the dog is over lapping the man in white shirt. There are a lot of distractions behind the main subject area. If this is a shot of the couple's glory in the rink it's maybe ok, but as a dog portrait less so.
The EXIF date suggests the image was recorded in jpeg although you say the RAW image was processed in Lightroom.
All the best
Ian

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

cazozphil
cazozphil e2 Member 1cazozphil vcard
6 Nov 2013 - 9:26 PM

Thank you so Moira for the mod. I appreciate everyone's feedback and that you have taken the time to post your mod for me to look and learn from, I like it. It does seem to be much sharper and I am going to have another play with my image again. Did you use Lightroom or Photoshop for the enhancements?

thanks again I really do appreciate you taking the time to do this.
Carol




Quote: I've uploaded a very quick effort. I used Enhance colour> Saturation/hue, selected blues and made a few adjustments to warm the tones slightly and reduce saturation. I also added a bit of Unsharp mask. It's far from perfect but I didn't want to go too far as it reduced the impact of the rosette, and time is limited here for more fiddly work!
As I mentioned above, mixed light sources are a pain. When you open a RAW file, check out the light temperature and tint sliders that appear top right of the screen, as well as the presets for different types of lighting.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

banehawi
banehawi Critique Team 10781 forum postsbanehawi vcard Canada2795 Constructive Critique Points
6 Nov 2013 - 10:58 PM

Hi Carol.

You have lots of feedback and encouragement so far.

I want to add a few comments on the image, and Im working with V2, assuming this is closer to the original.

I would use the rails as a level, and rotate the image; there is a strong yellow tone you can reduce to some extent with the colour balance tool; I personally address that glaring light a the rear, perhaps move some foliage over it; the high ISO has contributed to the "brushed" appearance of the dogs coat, a little sharpening helps. The ISO was not avoidable, but you should be happy with the result, - you sold the image, so the owner is happy with it.

I have uploaded a mod to show what I mean. View large.


regards


Willie

Last Modified By banehawi at 6 Nov 2013 - 10:59 PM

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

cazozphil
cazozphil e2 Member 1cazozphil vcard
7 Nov 2013 - 1:53 AM

Thank you so much Willie for that. Much appreciated. The sad thing in all this is that I don't actually know how to do manipulations in photoshop Sad

Thank you again
Carol




Quote: Hi Carol.

You have lots of feedback and encouragement so far.

I want to add a few comments on the image, and Im working with V2, assuming this is closer to the original.

I would use the rails as a level, and rotate the image; there is a strong yellow tone you can reduce to some extent with the colour balance tool; I personally address that glaring light a the rear, perhaps move some foliage over it; the high ISO has contributed to the "brushed" appearance of the dogs coat, a little sharpening helps. The ISO was not avoidable, but you should be happy with the result, - you sold the image, so the owner is happy with it.

I have uploaded a mod to show what I mean. View large.


regards


Willie

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

- Original Poster Comments
- Your Posts

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.