Is it just me, or are her pants a tad bit low? Not bad, just a little low. I love the colors in the background. I agree that the arch is not flattering to her stomach.
By the way, I don't know if you posted one pic or two, but I can see one picture and one box with a red X.
Hmmm... I have to agree that the arch in the back is really a step away from making this image work and the shoulders also give me the impression that she isn't comfortable. Always ask the model to relax her shoulders to see if it makes a difference as I can't tell if she just has higher shoulders or she is tightening up...
The last bit is the crop. If this is for a clothing brand I'd believe they would like a tighter crop on the upper torso to show off the wares or a full length tight crop for a wall poster which is a vertical panoramic. It just odd to crop right below the knee as it visually implies an amputation. Sometimes it works and this time it just seems to make her have stubby legs...
I do have to agree that the background is beautiful but maybe a lower depth of field and longer focal length would help it blur out and make the model and the clothes stand out more which is a typical setup for most clothing ads and senior work as the person become the central piece and the background is just that, a background.
Is it just me, or are her pants a tad bit low? Not bad, just a little low. I love the colors in the background. I agree that the arch is not flattering to her stomach.
By the way, I don't know if you posted one pic or two, but I can see one picture and one box with a red X.
Are her pants a tad bit low...I suppose it depends upon who's evaluating...in this case the model was instructed as to which clothes to wear for the shoot and how they were to be worn. In my personal opinion...more than a tad bit low. As to the red x...I was in the middle of loading another photo when I lost my internet connection. Will try again later. Actually surprising to me that the arched back is considered unattractive - this shot was ultimately selected and then used by the model for a comp card. Appreciate the feedback - always good to have a fresh perspective! I will keep my eyes open for models with a propensity for arching their backs.
Sincerely,
Jon
"Where there is no elegance of the heart...there is no elegance." Yves Saint Laurent
In agreement with comments from others plus a few nits....
- Mid-calf is an odd place to crop. A better bet is 3/4 length(above knee, below thigh) or just go for full length.
- I can live with hands with thumbs hooked in pockets or loops, but watch out for tight fists as it gives the appearance that the subject is not relaxed.
- Be wary of hair covering eyes....its pretty close here.
- I think a higher camera position in addition to a slightly more angling away from the camera with her shoulders would have been more flattering.
-Be careful of centered compositions. Leaving some dead space to the left of her would have been a niceness here.
- Using a shallower depth of focus would have REALLY made her pop against that background.
Actually surprising to me that the arched back is considered unattractive
Take into consideration that you are getting these opinions from photographers. We tend to see things quite differently than others. There is a whole thread about this in the technique section.
If the client likes it, that is all that really matters in the end. If you like it on top of that, even better.
Take into consideration that you are getting these opinions from photographers. We tend to see things quite differently than others. There is a whole thread about this in the technique section.
If the client likes it, that is all that really matters in the end. If you like it on top of that, even better.
Really, a whole thread...what does one have to do to join this amazing group of photographers...i'm obviously on the outside looking in...would love to see as you see...what an arrogant comment - wow!
"Where there is no elegance of the heart...there is no elegance." Yves Saint Laurent
Take into consideration that you are getting these opinions from photographers. We tend to see things quite differently than others. There is a whole thread about this in the technique section.
If the client likes it, that is all that really matters in the end. If you like it on top of that, even better.
I will try to remember that!
This was almost a good photo - pity about the arched back...no, really...fwiw, the arched back is just maybe the biggest stereotype in glamour and fashion photography...do any of you here engaging in the process of critiquing photos have any background in photography at all...just curious...
"Where there is no elegance of the heart...there is no elegance." Yves Saint Laurent
Her back is just fine by what I know.......at first i thought the panty strap might be a problem but you were shootingfor a client and clients in the variousindustries do make request as to how a mocel dresses for their campaign......here are some arched backs...they are all thru my books on Glamour
This was almost a good photo - pity about the arched back...no, really...fwiw, the arched back is just maybe the biggest stereotype in glamour and fashion photography...do any of you here engaging in the process of critiquing photos have any background in photography at all...just curious...
Hmm... well it was all constructive criticism that was given IMO.
The words I gave you come from being a teacher of photography, a teacher of lighting and posing, being a respected photographer where I live, which is pretty darn close to you btw, and that I host classes on model photography and have spoken at colleges, universities, camera stores etc on said topic.
I shoot model photography as part of my business, have had many models fly in from across the US to shoot with me and have worked with and learned from some amazing photographers and all of them gave their points like we have here in this thread. It's not that it's not a good photo, but it has glowing mistakes which we all do especially myself and we gave you the tools to make it better and thats all. Oh, and I do also take part in image critique at a few different photo competitions a year in the area so I guess I have some credentials in that as well. Also I am one of three photographers ever allowed to teach photography, model photography even, at the number one private Japanese Garden in the US, which happens to be located in Rockford Illinois. Just to shoot a wedding in there you'll spend over $5000 and I have been honored with the chance to teach my trade in that kind of setting.
Just to spice things up the last photo has again one blatant mistake and it's the loss of an entire limb. We as people who look at an image look at that and see a lost limb... dismemberment if you have it and as such looks strange. Don't be mad because I've done the same thing a million times and have to watch myself as I shoot.
I intentionally posted the above shot to illustrate the point that we tend to get caught up in the so-called, "rules and regulations of Photog 101." The shot above was not taken by me - I wish that I had taken it, however!
The photographer that you take to task for his poor composition and blatant mistake is Norman Jean Roy...one of the most sought after portrait and fashion photogs in the world right now. The model is, of course, Jessica Biel. The photo appeared in the Sept. 2006 isssue of Vanity Fair. Richard has asked me to remove it as an attachment and supply the link which I will do.
Maybe you can explain to Norman Jean Roy and the photo editors of Vanity Fair about dismemberment and the amputated arm and why this photo has a glaring mistake, "the loss of an entire arm." I have a hunch that all parties involved knew exactly what they were doing - and exactly which rules were being broken and why. We are too quick to criticize and point out what we consider to be glaring mistakes...when, in fact, the mistake is ours for not really looking and not really seeing the art that is right in front of us. I, sadly, am often guilty of this as well.
In the for what it's worth category - and it's not worth much...I have been shooting professionally since 1984 and, like you, have worked with some of the great photographers in this country and Europe. I spent some time looking at your work and it's lovely. Keep up the good work.
Hmm... well it was all constructive criticism that was given IMO.
The words I gave you come from being a teacher of photography, a teacher of lighting and posing, being a respected photographer where I live, which is pretty darn close to you btw, and that I host classes on model photography and have spoken at colleges, universities, camera stores etc on said topic.
I shoot model photography as part of my business, have had many models fly in from across the US to shoot with me and have worked with and learned from some amazing photographers and all of them gave their points like we have here in this thread. It's not that it's not a good photo, but it has glowing mistakes which we all do especially myself and we gave you the tools to make it better and thats all. Oh, and I do also take part in image critique at a few different photo competitions a year in the area so I guess I have some credentials in that as well. Also I am one of three photographers ever allowed to teach photography, model photography even, at the number one private Japanese Garden in the US, which happens to be located in Rockford Illinois. Just to shoot a wedding in there you'll spend over $5000 and I have been honored with the chance to teach my trade in that kind of setting.
Just to spice things up the last photo has again one blatant mistake and it's the loss of an entire limb. We as people who look at an image look at that and see a lost limb... dismemberment if you have it and as such looks strange. Don't be mad because I've done the same thing a million times and have to watch myself as I shoot.
In short, yes I have a background in photography.
"Where there is no elegance of the heart...there is no elegance." Yves Saint Laurent
Really, a whole thread...what does one have to do to join this amazing group of photographers...i'm obviously on the outside looking in...would love to see as you see...what an arrogant comment - wow!
"Where there is no elegance of the heart...there is no elegance." Yves Saint Laurent
Well I've learned alot from this thread...good and bad. Mainly, don't assume that just because someone posts an image in this forum, that they are looking for constructive critiques of their images. I guess some people just post their shots here to see how many attaboys they can get. I'll throw my 2 cents in and it has nothing to do with composition, or lighting, but it does have to do with how she's dressed...when will Hollister and Abercrombie quit trying to make our daughters look like 20 year old tramps? Just my honest opinion.
.........when will Hollister and Abercrombie quit trying to make our daughters look like 20 year old tramps? Just my honest opinion.
NEVER!!!! Sex sells and the bottom line is all they care about.....and yes if they had daughters that were of grat model material they would prostitute them in this fashion also....remember a lot of the ad execs and art directors for these companies are women that are mothers.......
Comments
www.banksy.me.uk - main website
http://galleries.banksy.me.uk - smugmug site
Glass: >Sigma 17-35mm,f2.8-4 DG >Tamron 28-75mm,f2.8 >Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro >Canon 70-200mm,f2.8L IS >Canon 200mm,f2.8L
Flash: >550EX >Sigma EF-500 DG Super >studio strobes
Sites: Jim Mitte Photography - Livingston Sports Photos - Brighton Football Photos
Wow, that was my favorite part!
By the way, I don't know if you posted one pic or two, but I can see one picture and one box with a red X.
www.naturalphotography.smugmug.com
Website
The last bit is the crop. If this is for a clothing brand I'd believe they would like a tighter crop on the upper torso to show off the wares or a full length tight crop for a wall poster which is a vertical panoramic. It just odd to crop right below the knee as it visually implies an amputation. Sometimes it works and this time it just seems to make her have stubby legs...
I do have to agree that the background is beautiful but maybe a lower depth of field and longer focal length would help it blur out and make the model and the clothes stand out more which is a typical setup for most clothing ads and senior work as the person become the central piece and the background is just that, a background.
***************************************
http://simplyphotostudio.com
http://decayedbeauty.com
Are her pants a tad bit low...I suppose it depends upon who's evaluating...in this case the model was instructed as to which clothes to wear for the shoot and how they were to be worn. In my personal opinion...more than a tad bit low. As to the red x...I was in the middle of loading another photo when I lost my internet connection. Will try again later. Actually surprising to me that the arched back is considered unattractive - this shot was ultimately selected and then used by the model for a comp card. Appreciate the feedback - always good to have a fresh perspective! I will keep my eyes open for models with a propensity for arching their backs.
Sincerely,
Jon
- Mid-calf is an odd place to crop. A better bet is 3/4 length(above knee, below thigh) or just go for full length.
- I can live with hands with thumbs hooked in pockets or loops, but watch out for tight fists as it gives the appearance that the subject is not relaxed.
- Be wary of hair covering eyes....its pretty close here.
- I think a higher camera position in addition to a slightly more angling away from the camera with her shoulders would have been more flattering.
-Be careful of centered compositions. Leaving some dead space to the left of her would have been a niceness here.
- Using a shallower depth of focus would have REALLY made her pop against that background.
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
Take into consideration that you are getting these opinions from photographers. We tend to see things quite differently than others. There is a whole thread about this in the technique section.
If the client likes it, that is all that really matters in the end. If you like it on top of that, even better.
Website
Really, a whole thread...what does one have to do to join this amazing group of photographers...i'm obviously on the outside looking in...would love to see as you see...what an arrogant comment - wow!
I will try to remember that!
This was almost a good photo - pity about the arched back...no, really...fwiw, the arched back is just maybe the biggest stereotype in glamour and fashion photography...do any of you here engaging in the process of critiquing photos have any background in photography at all...just curious...
Like both your shots well done......
Hmm... well it was all constructive criticism that was given IMO.
The words I gave you come from being a teacher of photography, a teacher of lighting and posing, being a respected photographer where I live, which is pretty darn close to you btw, and that I host classes on model photography and have spoken at colleges, universities, camera stores etc on said topic.
I shoot model photography as part of my business, have had many models fly in from across the US to shoot with me and have worked with and learned from some amazing photographers and all of them gave their points like we have here in this thread. It's not that it's not a good photo, but it has glowing mistakes which we all do especially myself and we gave you the tools to make it better and thats all. Oh, and I do also take part in image critique at a few different photo competitions a year in the area so I guess I have some credentials in that as well. Also I am one of three photographers ever allowed to teach photography, model photography even, at the number one private Japanese Garden in the US, which happens to be located in Rockford Illinois. Just to shoot a wedding in there you'll spend over $5000 and I have been honored with the chance to teach my trade in that kind of setting.
Just to spice things up the last photo has again one blatant mistake and it's the loss of an entire limb. We as people who look at an image look at that and see a lost limb... dismemberment if you have it and as such looks strange. Don't be mad because I've done the same thing a million times and have to watch myself as I shoot.
In short, yes I have a background in photography.
***************************************
http://simplyphotostudio.com
http://decayedbeauty.com
Hi,
I intentionally posted the above shot to illustrate the point that we tend to get caught up in the so-called, "rules and regulations of Photog 101." The shot above was not taken by me - I wish that I had taken it, however!
The photographer that you take to task for his poor composition and blatant mistake is Norman Jean Roy...one of the most sought after portrait and fashion photogs in the world right now. The model is, of course, Jessica Biel. The photo appeared in the Sept. 2006 isssue of Vanity Fair. Richard has asked me to remove it as an attachment and supply the link which I will do.
Maybe you can explain to Norman Jean Roy and the photo editors of Vanity Fair about dismemberment and the amputated arm and why this photo has a glaring mistake, "the loss of an entire arm." I have a hunch that all parties involved knew exactly what they were doing - and exactly which rules were being broken and why. We are too quick to criticize and point out what we consider to be glaring mistakes...when, in fact, the mistake is ours for not really looking and not really seeing the art that is right in front of us. I, sadly, am often guilty of this as well.
In the for what it's worth category - and it's not worth much...I have been shooting professionally since 1984 and, like you, have worked with some of the great photographers in this country and Europe. I spent some time looking at your work and it's lovely. Keep up the good work.
Best,
Jon
<DD class=bodytext></DD>
http://www.vanityfair.com/images/culture/2009/03/spotlight-women-0903-pp10.jpg
NEVER!!!! Sex sells and the bottom line is all they care about.....and yes if they had daughters that were of grat model material they would prostitute them in this fashion also....remember a lot of the ad execs and art directors for these companies are women that are mothers.......
It is sad but true....................
www.casongarner.com
5D MkII | 30D | 50mm f1.8 II | 85mm f1.8 | 24-70mm f2.8L | 70-200mm f2.8L IS II | Manfrotto 3021BPRO with 322RC2