Matej - thanks for all of your critiques on my images. I really value your input since you do some creative and beautiful work in black and white. You're right about the lighting and the film - the only thing I had handy was an old roll of HP5 lying around, so I did the best I could with it. I actually like the way the leaf turned out in the background; I think it adds some interest. If possible, I would like to discuss with you sometime what films, developer, etc. you use if different situations. Take care.
This is more interesting than a lot of flower photos I've seen but I'd say there's room for improvement.
1) Composition. I agree with Mary Sue. Having the top of the flower so close to the top of the frame and so much empty space underneath makes the photo look unbalanced. In principle I have nothing against non-standard compositions that do not abide by 'rules', but here I do not see a strong reason to compose things the way they are.
2) Tonality. I appreciate that you've retained highlight details, especially given the harsh light (judging by the shadow inside the flower; I think diffused light would have been better). Deeper tones in the background probably would not have hurt; the flower's dominance as the main subject would be reinforced. A red filter (along with a polarizer to eliminate reflections) might do the job, or, using the existing negative, you could try to at least burn in the brightest leaf on the right.
3) Choice of film. I think the delicate nature of flowers can be retained more easily using a delicate film like Fuji Acros. The extra speed of HP5 probably wasn't needed here.
Thanks Mary Sue; I think I just got lucky on this one. I have several other pictures that didn't come out quite so well. I agree a little more room up top would be nice and open up the picture. Thanks for the comment.
0 
{K:24381} 4/28/2005