#24 - What's this a post from sherstone?

sherstone

believe it or not I have decided to ask for some feedback this round.
I wish I had more time to participate more this way, as this part of the challenge is fun too.

If you have not already looked at the keywords in the entry gallery, then please take a guess at which Canadian photographer I am attempting to emulate here:



thanks.

Velvet-Art

I absolutely love this convertion and the lighting is spot on thumb

I'm sorry I'm not familiar with many Canadian photographers, but I just had to say I love this image thumb


Tim

Autonomous

i think that her face is a little bit too bright,
and i also think that since she has blue eyes, bw conversion does not really contribute to the image much and making it seem less unique

just my two cents

sherstone

Velvet-Art wrote:

I absolutely love this convertion and the lighting is spot on thumb

I'm sorry I'm not familiar with many Canadian photographers, but I just had to say I love this image thumb


Tim

Thanks Tim, since your not familiar with the photographer but still like it is good news.

sherstone

Autonomous wrote:

i think that her face is a little bit too bright,
and i also think that since she has blue eyes, bw conversion does not really contribute to the image much and making it seem less unique

just my two cents

Thank you for pointing out your observation, interestingly I had a conversion that had her face not quite as bright and comparing the two I felt that it lacked dimension and felt much "flatter". I will spend more time in the darkroom and see what comes of it.

I'm not sure what to say about the blue eyes and black and white other than color does not fit the emulation

Thank you so much for taking the time to respond.

dnie

I think your emulation approach is dead on. I could see him taking this picture, looking at the work he has done.
Her eyes don't bother me at all. They are what they are. I agree with Autonomous, somewhat, that maybe the face is a little bright on her right side... but honestly, until I read it, it had not struck me that way. I tend to be a visual person rather than technical. I either like something or don't and I don't always think through as to why.
Yours, I love.
Great job, as usual.

Flyinggina

I don't know who you are emulating, but I love this photograph. I agree with your choice re lighting on the face - it gives the face dimension and helps emphasize the bone structure. The hands are wonderful.

Just noticed that the eyes seem to be looking in slightly different directions. I can't tell whether that is an optical illusion or if that is the way her eyes work. It adds a sense of imbalance either way, which I find intriguing.

Very, very interesting portrait.

Virginia

dlplumer

Extraordinary lighting

sherstone

dnie wrote:

I agree with Autonomous, somewhat, that maybe the face is a little bright on her right side... but honestly, until I read it, it had not struck me that way. I tend to be a visual person rather than technical. I either like something or don't and I don't always think through as to why.
Yours, I love.
Great job, as usual.

Thanks dnie!
I am not against developing the image further but since your comment and several others seem to feel it is acceptable I may leave well enough alone. The biggest challenge is knowing the "average" brightness most people have their monitors set to. My process when developing exposure is to view an image on no less than 4 different monitors including a standard CRT, some calibrated some not, this hopefully gives me some sort of gauge to go by.

sherstone

Flyinggina wrote:

I don't know who you are emulating, but I love this photograph. I agree with your choice re lighting on the face - it gives the face dimension and helps emphasize the bone structure. The hands are wonderful.

Just noticed that the eyes seem to be looking in slightly different directions. I can't tell whether that is an optical illusion or if that is the way her eyes work. It adds a sense of imbalance either way, which I find intriguing.

Very, very interesting portrait.

Virginia

Why thank you very much Virginia.

I have to tell you that the portrait work you have done (and submitted), has been part of my inspiration to force myself to do more of them. I started out as mostly a landscape photographer but now have grown to love people and find portrait and people photography in general quite addictive.

In regards to the eyes I noticed that myself and agree, whether its an optical illusion or not it adds to the overall life within the moment.

sherstone

dlplumer wrote:

Extraordinary lighting

I so very glad you think so Dan. Thanks for taking the time to take a look.

dnie

sherstone wrote:

Thanks dnie!
I am not against developing the image further but since your comment and several others seem to feel it is acceptable I may leave well enough alone. The biggest challenge is knowing the "average" brightness most people have their monitors set to. My process when developing exposure is to view an image on no less than 4 different monitors including a standard CRT, some calibrated some not, this hopefully gives me some sort of gauge to go by.

good point! Mine is not calibrated.
Like I said, I liked it as is, but after seeing someone else question the brightness... made me question myself also. I think any adjustments you might make would have to be so slight that it wouldn't make a huge difference or it could mess it up.
In other words... Good! I love it!

Katmitchell

Hi Sherstone
awwwwww come on the suspense already.. who are you emulating? I wanna know...winkwink

well.. I don't know who it is, so I cant say whether or not you nailed it on the skin... some photogs go for the deep wrinkle and aged effect full of character in the skin and for that you need that harsh and bright light you employed here, however, if the person you are emulating uses the diffused light to smooth such characteristics, then maybe you need to tone down the lighting or diffuse it some..

Either way.. this is a superb shot.. I love the way the lower half of her body comes out at you, the direction of the fingers really aids that effect. I like the salt and pepper hair with that sweater and the back light is very >> classy looking... I will say this.. The face after one looks at it long enough begins to look a little divided, half lit and half dark, perhaps a reflector on the other side bouncing some of that back would help? see it is hard to tell, because that may be the effect you want depending on who this mysterious person your emulating shoots.. lol

the model has so much character and expression, she has a very classy and feminine look, yet strong and willful...

This photo is very classy and I can only hope to pull off portraiture like this some day...

I just love the black, silver and white play here..

Kuddos Sherstone..

Kat

Katmitchell

ok.. got the info
well,,

Somebody turned me onto who it is.. so ok... then from looking at his work you did come very close to the way he shoots people...

I noticed that he did employ a more blown out look on the faces and also the division on the faces too... wow.. you did a great job here...clap

Kat

sherstone

Katmitchell wrote:

well,,

Somebody turned me onto who it is.. so ok...
Kat

Sorry Kat I obviously was not quick enough. I was going to say if you are curious enough to just look at the keywords in the entry gallery all the answers are there

Thank you for your wonderful compliments.

Sean

sherstone

Autonomous wrote:

i think that her face is a little bit too bright,

How is this?



First one is darker version, second one is the original version.

Katmitchell

definitely
Yes, love it.. much improved.. it still holds the character and technique/style of the way the guy you are imitating used harsh lighting on people, but it is toned down to make it easier on the eyes. nice rework.!!:ivar

By the way I looked at his site and wow... my favorite is 1952 Stanley Park



Kat

The Curious Camel

Sean, once again, an amazing image.
I looked at both portraits for a long time.
I tend to favor the original.
I am in awe of how you seem to find just the right person/look for whatever it is you are going for.
Example, your Inner Journey entry.
I am not familiar with the artist you are emulating but I did take a peek and you seem to have managed a superb emulation. I'm sure he would be proud.

Good luck

g

sherstone

Katmitchell wrote:

By the way I looked at his site and wow... my favorite is 1952 Stanley Park
Kat

Interesting that that one is your favorite because it is so far removed from his other work.

The Curious Camel wrote:

Sean, once again, an amazing image.
I looked at both portraits for a long time.
I tend to favor the original.
I am in awe of how you seem to find just the right person/look for whatever it is you are going for.
Example, your Inner Journey entry.
I am not familiar with the artist you are emulating but I did take a peek and you seem to have managed a superb emulation. I'm sure he would be proud.

Good luck

g

Thanks Gail,
I guess I'll wait and see if there is any more feedback because now we have a 50/50 split on which one is better

Are we going to be seeing an entry from you this time around?

Velvet-Art

After staring at both new and original versions, I still am drawn to the original, the new darker one doesnt have the same "pop" to me.

Tim

The Curious Camel

Sherstone

Are we going to be seeing an entry from you this time around?

Not sure. The first artist I wanted to emulate is very diverse in skill and creativity.
He has a vision, makes a plan and executes it to perfection.
Besides, I don't have any waders.

The other artist I thought of does beautiful wildlife images but it seems images of animals don't go over very well here. :cry

So who knows. We'll see.

Thanks for asking

g

sherstone

The Curious Camel wrote:

Besides, I don't have any waders.

g

You could always buy some :poke

The Curious Camel

sherstone wrote:

You could always buy some :poke

lol, waders without the knowhow to complete a beautiful excution would be humilating.

I think I've done that to myself with the last few entries. :bash

I do have some ideas but we'll see. Keep poking maybe it will help.:help

g

sherstone

The Curious Camel wrote:

I think I've done that to myself with the last few entries. :bash

I disagree, I think I can safely speak for a lot of people here that your work is exceptional!

Velvet-Art

sherstone wrote:

I disagree, I think I can safely speak for a lot of people here that your work is exceptional!

Tim

divamum

Velvet-Art wrote:

Tim

me three!

Flyinggina

sherstone wrote:

I disagree, I think I can safely speak for a lot of people here that your work is exceptional!

Me four.

Love your work and really enjoy seeing what you come up with.

Virginia

The Curious Camel

I'm speechless now.