Porrtraits: Masha and Nadya

Yuri Pautov

Masha and Nadya/ This time made several b&w...
1 Masha

2 Nadya

3 b&w Masha

4

5

6

7

8


Spasibo,
Yuri
http://twitter.com/#!/YuriPautov
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000462556124

jiro

Very nice use of colors. The background doesn't fight for attention relative to the subject. I'd say all shots are very professionally executed. Hats off to you, Yuri. thumb

Yuri Pautov

Thank you so much for your high mark!

briandelion

Beautiful work. #5,6,8 are my favorites. The arrangement of the arms in #8 reminds me of a Cranach the Elder painting. http://www.abcgallery.com/C/cranach/cranach.html

Icebear

Superb, as usual. I don't care for the washed out look on #2, but oh, what beautiful photographs. #6 is a show-stopper.

Wachel

Wow...all of your work is great and I am constantly amazed by the models that you get!

andre

Absolutely beautiful and great use of light. Well done !!!!

NeilL

It's quite a long while since I looked at your pics, Yuri. To my eyes you are at a new high level with this set. Two things mainly impress me, first these images succeed by the lighting, and yet the lighting is not what dominates. I made a comment in another thread here recently that I was struggling to achieve just that quality. Second, your treatment of the skin is to me more attractive but at the same time more natural than previously. These two qualities, of lighting which is indeed very powerful yet completely unobtrusive, and skin which is ideal without being false, together with a third, the total absence of forced "commercialised sexiness" in the faces and posing, distinguish your images here positively from the majority, in my opinion, especially from many US shooters.

They are perhaps difficult to categorise for just those reasons, not fashion, not boudoir, not glamour. And I think in this is a clue to lifting the impact of these images. I mean, for you to confront the question of what category they belong in. If I were making this decision, I would go for the boudoir genre, even though they are not in that kind of setting nor with that kind of posing. This is the most dominant feeling I get from them. If you come along with me for the moment with that idea, then you will understand why I now say that I think the background detracts in those images where it exists. In those images I personally would like to see the "architecture-furnishings" given a more boudoir shadowiness and intimacy.

To my eyes these images belong in retro 19th century and 60s studio portraiture, and I enjoy them also for those associations. I would like to see them given a contemporary edge with a more intimate and suggestive nuance, without going into "billboard advertising".

My favourite is #6, it comes closest to the feel I want, and it just arrested my attention.

Neil

mayassa

Your creativity never fails to amaze me, could you give me an idea of your lighting position, distance, and angles for number 3,5,6

Thanks

NeilL

mayassa wrote: »

Your creativity never fails to amaze me, could you give me an idea of your lighting position, distance, and angles for number 3,5,6

Thanks

lemme guess (u might be able to too)

all are lit with the same setup. two 24" diffusers. the key 15deg (our)R of lens axis, the fill 45deg to (our)L of the lens axis. both at 1/2 power. both at face level, with the key at 4' and the fill at 5', except for #6 where they are both equidistant.

???

Neil

Bryans12v

Stunning! The shots, girls, lighting, skin tones, everything!

Yuri Pautov

jiro wrote: »

Very nice use of colors. The background doesn't fight for attention relative to the subject. I'd say all shots are very professionally executed. Hats off to you, Yuri. thumb

Thank you so much

Yuri Pautov

Icebear wrote: »

Superb, as usual. I don't care for the washed out look on #2, but oh, what beautiful photographs. #6 is a show-stopper.

John, thank you so much!

Yuri Pautov

Wachel wrote: »

Wow...all of your work is great and I am constantly amazed by the models that you get!

Thank you!

Yuri Pautov

andre wrote: »

Absolutely beautiful and great use of light. Well done !!!!

Andre, thank you!

Yuri Pautov

NeilL wrote: »

It's quite a long while since I looked at your pics, Yuri. To my eyes you are at a new high level with this set. Two things mainly impress me, first these images succeed by the lighting, and yet the lighting is not what dominates. I made a comment in another thread here recently that I was struggling to achieve just that quality. Second, your treatment of the skin is to me more attractive but at the same time more natural than previously. These two qualities, of lighting which is indeed very powerful yet completely unobtrusive, and skin which is ideal without being false, together with a third, the total absence of forced "commercialised sexiness" in the faces and posing, distinguish your images here positively from the majority, in my opinion, especially from many US shooters.

They are perhaps difficult to categorise for just those reasons, not fashion, not boudoir, not glamour. And I think in this is a clue to lifting the impact of these images. I mean, for you to confront the question of what category they belong in. If I were making this decision, I would go for the boudoir genre, even though they are not in that kind of setting nor with that kind of posing. This is the most dominant feeling I get from them. If you come along with me for the moment with that idea, then you will understand why I now say that I think the background detracts in those images where it exists. In those images I personally would like to see the "architecture-furnishings" given a more boudoir shadowiness and intimacy.

To my eyes these images belong in retro 19th century and 60s studio portraiture, and I enjoy them also for those associations. I would like to see them given a contemporary edge with a more intimate and suggestive nuance, without going into "billboard advertising".

My favourite is #6, it comes closest to the feel I want, and it just arrested my attention.

Neil

Neil, thank you very much for your kindest words!

Yuri Pautov

mayassa wrote: »

Your creativity never fails to amaze me, could you give me an idea of your lighting position, distance, and angles for number 3,5,6

Thanks

Thank you very much!
I make so called 'long exposure portraits', or 'portraits in pilot light' with 2 flashes - one with a soft box (approx 1,5x1,5 meter) and another with an umbrella reflector. They stand 1,5-2.5 meters away from my models. I dont use flash light - only pilot light (i.e. just simple 60W lamps)...

NeilL

Yuri Pautov wrote: »

Thank you very much!
I make so called 'long exposure portraits', or 'portraits in pilot light' with 2 flashes - one with a soft box (approx 1,5x1,5 meter) and another with an umbrella reflector. They stand 1,5-2.5 meters away from my models. I dont use flash light - only pilot light (i.e. just simple 60W lamps)...

That's extremely interesting, Yuri. Continuous lighting has been pretty much neglected for strobes, but I think, and I can see from your work for example, that it has its own potential. By coincidence Charles (hackbone) just posted a notice about Rod Evans' video tutorial of his techniques with continuous.

Something that catches me right at the moment my interest is piqued.

Neil