This is lovely. The shapes and lines of the grasses and damsel fly are perfect. The colors are lovely, also, although the darks feel oversaturated (especially the red tones) and too contrasty. It’s really just the shadow area below the vertical grass. The part of the pond(?) bottom we see feels harsh to me. Maybe that was your intent, if so, carry on. 
John, You captured a very interesting image here. I like the circle rings of the water, and the shadows of the grass allowing a glimpse into the bottom of the water. For me, I would rather have a closer look at the damselfly, but with a 200 mm, and shooting from the edge of the water, I am guessing, that might not have been possible, as they are very little critters. Still a very pleasing image.
Thanks Shirley! With these images of insects in the water I wanted to accentuate their vulnerability and delicacy in their habitat. Also, as in the “Jesus Bug” image you commented on, my attempt was to show the world of rhythms that they create with their movements. Jesus Bug #1
You’re correct re: the size of the damsel fly and I suppose that this doesn’t really fit in the macro category. Where might it fit better? JT
John, I appreciate you sharing your intent with both images. I better understand the size of them in the environment. I think it works in the macro category. I don’t know of a better location. Anyway, I better understand, because you sure did accentuate their vulnerability and delicacy in their habitat. I watch that in my own yard, with birds capturing spiders, and spiders capturing bees, etc. It is a tough world for them to survive in.
Thanks for your response Shirley. I’m glad the intent is clear. JT
1 Like
John: Really nice find and I do think this is the proper gallery. You could also post this in Flora since the grass is an integral part of the image but for me the damselfly is the main subject and so Macro is more appropriate IMO. I do like your rework as it makes a fine image even better. I especially like the water action and the shadows on the water. Did you use a polarizer? Just curious. 
>=))>
PS: I edited your title to reflect the repost. It’s always a good idea so that folks will know to revisit.
Thanks Bill. No I didn’t use a polarizer. This was made in 2004 with one of the first 4/3 zoom lenses. The two Olympus zooms that I used back then on the E-1 rendered water like no other lens I’ve ever used. Sorry that I parted with them. JT
John, the mix of water reflection, isolated grass leaves, damselfly and the ring of ripples look great. One thing that you can do with a repost is add it to the original post. Then when someone goes to the large view they can arrow back and forth to see the changes.
1 Like
Thanks Mark. Very cool feature! Will do. JT
I actually think the original was better - it wasn’t the lightness of the shadows, rather the detail that looked unreal to me. I did an edit to illustrate what I’m thinking. I selected just the vertical shadow, then did a brightness/exposure layer, decreasing the contrast and brightness. I think if the shadow was totally silhouetted, it would be fine, too, but I take it you want to keep the detail that we see through the shadow. Anyway, I do find this to be a very cool photo. My comments are a real nit pick. 
Looks good Bonnie. Thanks for taking the time for a rework. I think I was going for a more painterly/graphic look so it makes sense that you would think that the detail was not realistic. This image was included in a series of 10 images called “Water Music” that was in several local exhibits back in 2004-05. I would have been happy to display your version. JT
1 Like