Jennifer is not a model BUT

Bilsen

I didn't care.


Spent last week cruising the Caribbean behind Isaac with some friends, their sons and one sons' girlfriend. While talking at dinner one night we got on the subject of my hobby and girlfriend asked if I'd do a shoot with her. In a minute you'll know why I didn't mind.


Here's non-model Jennifer. Granted she doesn't have a range of expressions and it was some work showing her poses but does anyone really mind?


Oh yeah, before I get jumped, that IS her skintone.



2.


3.


4.


5.


6. and just to show all her gorgeous

Bilsen

She also came back here at home yesterday and I'll post those this week.

Quincy T

Several of the images are just really busy, John. I kind of like 2, but I feel there's something missing there. This post just doesn't do it for me, but many of yours do!

novicesnapper

Nice shooting. I was wondering where you have been lately. "we were just out cruising the Caribbean" lol nice. I like the skin tone, almost an olive complexion. Not sure I could do her justice like you did. #3 for me, the body lines, the look, all nice.

Bilsen

Thanks Novice. She did really well, especially for high noon on a Caribbean Island.

Quincy, no need to worry. As many on here will tell you, I often like to incorporate scenery rather than blast it away. I also routinely get torched for it but I never get offended. Unlike the clowns running the country, we can disagree without all the rancor.
I suspect Diva, Bryce and others are gonna go totally with you but given where we were, I like them this way.

D3Sshooter

Love all of them, but especially five.... Not a model ? She sure could be one.... nice shots.

Bryce Wilson

Hi John:

First, I think she does have a model butt!

Two and five are my favorite background scenes. I hope you experimented with some more poses in that hammock.

As far as the scenery thing goes, I think I know what bothers me and others. I get confused as to what I'm supposed to be looking at.

I think that if the model is the primary focus, props and scenery should be secondary and add to the look and feel of the model. If scenery is important that should be the focus and the model added as the prop to enhance the scenery.

Do me a favor, the next time you take one of your lovely's out for a session. Find a scene that would stand on its own as a landscape photograph. Set up as if you were taking just that landscape photograph, then find a spot in which the model will add to that landscape photograph and have her take up no more that 25% of the entire image.

Bilsen

Thanks D3. Part of what fascinates me about this hobby is how some loves 'em and some hates 'em and I never know which will be which.

Bryce, my friend, that's a really interesting thought about landscape. I'm back in the Caribbean next week (this time with models including Cyndi ) so I'm definitely gonna try out your idea.

To be dead honest Ihave never understood how anyone looking at #3 or #5 could possibly be "distracted" by the scenery, but it's a common comment so even though I don't get it, I accept it as valid. For myself, I wouldn't even know there are trees there.

As far as the hammock, I shot that from every possible angle BUT there was a rather corpulent guy in the hammock behind her and because of all the ropes it was impossible to clone him out. The two I showed were the only two I could get without him.

D3Sshooter

JohnGalt_ny wrote: »

Thanks D3. Part of what fascinates me about this hobby is how some loves 'em and some hates 'em and I never know which will be which.

Taste can not be discussed right, we all have one And lucky its different for each of us otherwise we would all have chased the same wife.... (well yes some years ago )

Bilsen

A Couple more of non-model Jenn and this time some are wide open Av for Quincy and Bryce.



2.


3.


4. a different Hammock for Bryce


5.


6.

Bryce Wilson

JohnGalt_ny wrote: »

As far as the hammock, I shot that from every possible angle BUT there was a rather corpulent guy in the hammock behind her and because of all the ropes it was impossible to clone him out

Beauty and the Beast?

And I do LOVE that hammock with the white sand below!!!!!!! The not a model butt looks nice too!

Loose the pose in number two.

divamum

typing on phone, so scuse telegramese and typos....

john, it isn't always about bokeh. sure, sometimes that blur can do the isolating but it isn't always necessary to annihilate the bg.

the bg DOES have to enhance and "frame" the subject though, and when it's too prominent/distracting/bright/whatever it becomes "too loud".

I think.the root of this "problem"is exactly what you say above: you're so enchanted by the model tha you DON'T "see" the other stuff. as the photographer, you can't afford that, in the sane way a musician can't get so emotionally overinvolved in "how emotional it makes me feel" that they play wrong notes. you can occasionally get away with it and it works, but not consistently. make any sense?

on a plus note, #5 in the second set is KILLAH. light, pose the works. good job . And THAT is why I'm posting this - you're capable of taking some really kicka** shots like that one, so don't sell short on the others. you're better than that

eta: repeating phone disclaimer. if i sound abrupt, i dont mean to, its just hard to write in this thing!

Bilsen

diva, the last time somebody told me I was "better than that" I was getting horsewhipped with rosary beads.

Anyway, thanks for the comments and the compliment ( I think )

Bryce, we agree on Jenn and her butt but we are gonna disagree on that pose. One of my favs.

I'll be doing a Caribbean model shoot next week so get the torches and pitchforks ready everybody.

Bryce Wilson

JohnGalt_ny wrote: »

Bryce, we agree on Jenn and her butt but we are gonna disagree on that pose. One of my favs.

I'll be doing a Caribbean model shoot next week so get the torches and pitchforks ready everybody.

It's really not the whole pose, the pose in and of itself is nice, its just that foot in front....Driving me batty....Then again, I may be weird.

zoomer

She is a tropical beaty with huge potential. Unfortunately none of these shots has a good recipe mix of pose, background and light working together to show her off at her best.

Bilsen

Thanks D3. Part of what fascinates me about this hobby is how some loves 'em and some hates 'em and I never know which will be which.

Thanks Zoomer, but see my above quote.

We could not possibly disagree more but I always enjoy hearing from you.

jonh68

divamum wrote: »

I think.the root of this "problem"is exactly what you say above: you're so enchanted by the model tha you DON'T "see" the other stuff. as the photographer, you can't afford that, in the sane way a musician can't get so emotionally overinvolved in "how emotional it makes me feel" that they play wrong notes. you can occasionally get away with it and it works, but not consistently. make any sense?

I think that is the "problem" too. When people make a comment about the backgrounds and overall look of the photograph, they are looking at the total of the photograph. Does the photo work? If someone who was not a model were to be in the same spot, would the picture be as good or still interesting to look at? If you want to feature scenery, would the shot be interesting if a model wasn't in it?

In other words, do you want comments on how good looking the model is, or do you want comments on how to improve look of your photography? This is where you find the discrepancy in critiques. Some are happy just to see a pretty girl. Some get past that and see the overall picture. When you as a photographer can get passed how good looking the models are, and then concentrate on the scenery, lighting, and overall composition, you will really make the models shine.

zoomer

as long as you continue to disagree with the critiques you are given and just be ok with that...then this is the level you will stay at.
Now if you are ok with the level you are at then all is good....if so just let us know and we will just talk about how pretty your models are and not about the quality of the overall photos.

Bilsen

These last two comments are really interesting considering how many ideas and suggestions I've taken on here and how many times I've thanked so many for the assistance. I'm pretty sure that C&C ers such as Diva, Zoomer, Quarik, Bryce and others have been able to see the comments they've made have been heard and incorporated in my shoots.

With that said, I believe everything should be considered but not everything necessarily adopted. When I coached college level pitchers I'd tell them "Listen to everyone but find what works for you. Otherwise you'll just end up confused and totally ineffective. You must be your own best coach". That's where I am with photography and this board has allowed me to learn a tremendous amount while adating it to my own style.

I am years past "pretty girl syndrome" (though I freely admit that I fall in temporary love with my models) BUT as I have discussed many times, my photographic vision sometimes incorporates the backgrounds as part of the image. I know there are many who don't agree and I understand there are frames I like that others won't. As I said above, I find that both refreshing and part of the charm of this hobby.

I have long valued not only the advice and comments but also the fact that disagreement is not taken as rejection. I continue to do so but to expect that I will blindly agree is just not realistic.

I apologize in advance if I sound grouched out here but these comments are erroneous and probably sting a bit coming from people whose opinions I respect whether or not I agree down the line.

PHEW that feels better --- Friends again anyone????