

I think that this photo is one of my best dragonfly captures. I like the depth of field and the rarity of the picture—I don't see many yellow dragonflies at any of the Flickr groups.
I anticipated lots of comments after I published this picture to my Flickr stream. That, however, has not been the case. Since last Sunday when I posted it, I have received only 13 views and 2 comments, many fewer than a dragonfly picture of mine usually gets. I don't know—maybe it's too green and yellow; there are no strong contrasts in color. Maybe the thumbnail that shows up on a person's "Contacts" page or in a "Group" collection isn't interesting enough to click on for the larger option.
I know that the number of comments by Flickr members does not mean that a picture is any good. Folks cultivate attention by making lots of comments on other people's work; those recipients feel obligated to return the favor. Flickr is often MySpace for adults, an online hangout where fragile egos get boosted with positive [though often undeserved] feedback. I have seen some ugly photos get tons of comments while real art [if the person doesn't have a huge Flickr audience] gets hardly any attention.
As proof, I give you the photo below, which, in my opinion, has uninteresting subject matter [a dragonfly ass!], bad composition, and distracting color. It, however, has earned its photographer 85 comments and 617 views as of this writing.

Compare it to this photo, by geckonia, one of my contacts. This is a brilliant capture; I'm thinking about contacting the artist to ask if I can buy a print. Despite its beauty, it has only 3 comments [one of them mine!] and 31 views.

Even though neither of my two "girls" from the Greenwood Urban Wetland garnered much Flickr attention, I still like them. I have that stubborn allegiance to my art that lack of Flickr attention cannot sway!