I've been really impressed with the standard on this forum recently - lots and lots of very good shots, but perhaps even more impressive are those from people just starting out who are managing to capture some really good stuff. One thing that pushes people on to better and better work is critiquing. This is the act of taking a single photo and really looking at it - taking maybe 5-10 minutes to write all your thoughts about every little thing that works or doesn't work, and delivering a small presentation on the shot. I have to say that I feel this is a failing point of the forum so far - we've got lots of discussionabout gear and a few posters' shots receive pages and pages of comments, but many go unnoticed. The poster should include as much info as he likes! For example, sometimes a shot is just pretty, and maybe all that needs to be said is a few words on technical settings. Sometimes a shot has a background that should be explained before anyone goes into it. A poster can also draw attention to specific areas of a shot that he'd like special attention paid to. A critique thread needs some moderation if it's not to become just another 'show my images' thread. Photosig is a critique website - people there are enforced to 1 image posted per 3 critiques made. I suggest the same thing here - post an image, then do not post another image before you have critiqued (at least!) 3 other peoples' images. Finally, a critique thread should not feature merely your best shots. Everyone pulls a stunner once in a while - we know it and these shots don't really need critiquing - we can just sit back and enjoy the praise Critiques are most useful when you know a shot can be improved but you're not quite sure how. I'll start off with an example shot in my next post. Hope this is sucessful - good critiscm is what really keeps me going with photography!