lol, you're the one defending the shot you deleted from the original post. Sure, we all sometimes make mediocre pictures. But you tried to act like the fact that you had overcast lighting is a valid excuse for what was quite frankly a bad shot in the original. Can you honestly look at that first picture you posted and tell yourself that the lighting wasn't bad, and that it was anything better than mediocre?
Here's the deal, I'm just purely speaking to your picture. It was poor. I think you know that, you made a fairly substantial edit and deleted the original. Basically the edit you made addressed THE EXACT ISSUES I POINTED OUT. You can make personal attacks all you want, it doesn't change the fact that your original picture was poor.
I have nothing personal against you, but if you want C&C, I'm going to point those things out. Just like I pointed out that your edited picture was a really good edit (though the pose still looks uncomfortable).
Yes or No, is your edited version better than what you originally posted, the one you deleted? Yes or no, did it not add more contrast, ie addressing the flat lighting?
Yes or no, you understand what an ad hominem attack is, and why they're considered a logical fallacy?
you've yet to even address a single thing I talked about with your picture, you've done nothing but personally attack me because you're bitter about some thread from like 7 months ago.