Options

Woods and Water Nymph - Ann Marie

BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
edited July 29, 2013 in People
So continuing my move to concepts rather than generic fashion/swimsuit, Ann Marie wanted to be a wood nymph and water muse.

BTW, I KNOW the skin tone is green in the wood nymph set. That's MU and intentional. Feel free to dislike it but it's not a mistake.:D

p1688407737-4.jpg

2.
p1648060005-4.jpg

3.
p1848972319-4.jpg

4.
p1859264751-4.jpg

5.
p1655773150-4.jpg

6.
p1830258535-4.jpg

7.
p1673035865-4.jpg

8.
p1707669962-4.jpg
Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen

Comments

  • Options
    puzzledpaulpuzzledpaul Registered Users Posts: 1,621 Major grins
    edited July 18, 2013
    Can't help but wonder what #5 would look like, taken from water level (what else from me :) ) ...with a decent / distant bg ...

    pp
    Website

    Flickr
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited July 18, 2013
    puzzledpaul wrote: »
    Can't help but wonder what #5 would look like, taken from water level (what else from me :) ) ...with a decent / distant bg ...

    pp


    Ooh. ^^^ nod.gif

    I think #1 is the winner here, although I'd love some more artsy processing to go with the concept.

    I actually like the river ones, but what's funny is that they read like fashion/swimsuit shots to me - if you hadn't told me they were "concept", I wouldn't have known :) 5/6 are the keepers there for me, although totally agree with Paul on angle and perhaps softer lighting with a wider aperture.....
    facebook | photo site |
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited July 18, 2013
    Paul, I'll take another look through the RAWs. I may have one you suggest.

    UPDATE: son of a gun
    p1633879692-4.jpg

    rolleyes1.gifroflDiva, I think you're right. I guess my patterns are showing in the swimsuit.

    As for artistic treatments, I'm actually working on a few. Just haven't found one I like yet. Will get back to you on that.
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    puzzledpaulpuzzledpaul Registered Users Posts: 1,621 Major grins
    edited July 18, 2013
    Bilsen wrote: »
    Paul, I'll take another look through the RAWs. I may have one you suggest.

    Thanks for the revisit to the scene, but I was thinking a somewhat lower* pov and a bg that's many tens of yards away :)

    pp


    *Approx an inch of clearance between lens hood and water - hardly in same category as yours, but it's the easiest to link to.

    http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=227094&highlight=cheap+crown
    Website

    Flickr
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited July 19, 2013
    Understood Paul. However, since I took my camera and original 24-105 for a swim in the Gulf of Mexico several years ago, I have been somewhat hydrophobic. Laughing.gif
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited July 19, 2013
    I feel the last one is my favorite. To me the underside of the chin is one of the sexiest parts on a woman. On the first group they don't all seem feminine to me.
    Charles
    www.cameraone.biz
  • Options
    Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited July 19, 2013
    Don't have a lot of time to go into detail...

    I really thinK you need to expand your horizons a bit. Get a little more creative, explore different angles, expressions, lighting and poses.

    To me, and this is my opinion only, this set looks "same ole, same ole", from you.

    If this was mass shooting for dollars I would understand, but I know it isn't so you have the time to do it.

    Take it as a challenge!
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited July 19, 2013
    Bryce Wilson wrote: »
    Don't have a lot of time to go into detail...

    I really thinK you need to expand your horizons a bit. Get a little more creative, explore different angles, expressions, lighting and poses.

    To me, and this is my opinion only, this set looks "same ole, same ole", from you.

    If this was mass shooting for dollars I would understand, but I know it isn't so you have the time to do it.

    Take it as a challenge!

    ^^^^clap.gifnod.gif
    facebook | photo site |
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited July 24, 2013
    OKAYYYY Bryce and Diva.

    What would you like to see. I am totally listening.
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    D3SshooterD3Sshooter Registered Users Posts: 1,187 Major grins
    edited July 24, 2013
    I do like the update, very glossy. The greens is a matter of taste, but seldom does green work for the skin..... but I do understand the idea and MU.
    A photographer without a style, is like a pub without beer
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited July 25, 2013
    Bryce Wilson wrote: »
    Don't have a lot of time to go into detail...

    I really thinK you need to expand your horizons a bit. Get a little more creative, explore different angles, expressions, lighting and poses.

    To me, and this is my opinion only, this set looks "same ole, same ole", from you.

    If this was mass shooting for dollars I would understand, but I know it isn't so you have the time to do it.

    Take it as a challenge!
    OKAYYYY Bryce and Diva.

    What would you like to see. I am totally listening.

    Trying to figure out how to put this so it makes sense. I can't speak for Bryce, but I think I'd like to see you shoot a few sets for "art" instead of "sexy". Where the photograph in its entirety is more important than the "hot model". You've approached this in some of the world tour shots (there are some really good shots in that series), but I still feel like "sexy" is the goal, despite the concept.

    You know what else would be neat to see you try? A series of sessions with a NOT "god she's the sexisest thing I've ever seen". I'd like to see you do a few shoots with somebody a little overweight, maybe a 40-something instead of a 20 year old hottie, somebody not confident in herself, not able to project into the lens/coordinate her body instinctively, and looking to YOU to bring the most out of her. Shoot her in jeans and a plain tshirt or a simple summer dress, not for "sultry", but for "she's beautiful no matter what, and I lit her and posed her to make her look like a supermodel"

    I bet that after you've done that, you will be able to bring something amazing to your shoots with ladies who have all the assets and modelling experience already!!!

    Just thoughts.
    facebook | photo site |
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited July 25, 2013
    OK Diva, how about two 50 somethings

    Barb B.
    p1140002468-4.jpg

    Gail
    p47576558-4.jpg

    or a plus size doing her first shoot?
    p286907107-4.jpg

    or a possibly less than "model pretty" girl (pretty nonetheless) who just wanted to feel good
    p1493689360-4.jpg
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited July 25, 2013
    The first one's not bad, but I still feel they're all in that "what guys are supposed to think is sexy" vibe, rather than images which make the subject feel (as well as look) glamourous.

    Another way of putting it: I'd love to see you shoot some PRETTY images instead of "sexy" ones. Just beautifully composed, beautifully lit, artistically conceived shots. ne_nau.gif:)
    facebook | photo site |
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited July 25, 2013
    I guess I'm not getting the concept. I don't see anything remotely sexy about any of these. Sorry Diva, but I don't get it.headscratch.gif
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited July 25, 2013
    Barb B: Fur boots, low tight tank with cleavage up the wazoo, legs-crossed in sexy manner

    Plus size: cowboy boots and Daisy Dukes and her leg wrapped nearly around her neck, mixed with big ole tractor.

    Less than model pretty: implied nudity, tight jeans a** shot

    These are all stereotypical "male fantasy" looks. Just for a moment, think about how you would react to these shots if they were intended as senior portraits instead of model portfolio (obviously, age is not the factor here lol).

    Don't get me wrong, I don't think everything needs to look like a pretty-pretty senior picture, but playing around with that kind of different style (which is WAY outside what you normally do) might give you some added skills and ideas to bring back to your other work (just like senior portrait shooters who do some commercial/fashion work bring that back to their more conservative styles).

    This is just food for thought - you did ask! thumb.gif
    facebook | photo site |
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited July 25, 2013
    I absolutely did Diva and I'll continue to.thumb.gif

    I'LL EVEN TRY TO LISTEN AS I HAVE IN THE PAST.rolleyes1.gifLaughing.gif

    I'm not even arguing here. I guess I'm just old but I really don't see the sexy.
    I see the pretty (especially Gail) but just not the sexy.ne_nau.gif
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited July 25, 2013
    I'm going to beat you up a little also. This series lacks posing. Most seem that you just said stand over there and snapped a shot. No feminine quality to the pose. The lighting just seems to be there also. I've hit a wall plenty of times also.
    Charles
    www.cameraone.biz
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited July 26, 2013
    Ahhh Hack, it wouldn't be a Bilsen thread without you guys piling on. Laughing.gif

    I really do appreciate the comments.
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    puzzledpaulpuzzledpaul Registered Users Posts: 1,621 Major grins
    edited July 26, 2013
    divamum wrote: »
    ...think I'd like to see you shoot a few sets for "art" instead of "sexy". Where the photograph in its entirety is more important than the "hot model" ...
    divamum wrote: »
    ...
    Another way of putting it: I'd love to see you shoot some PRETTY images instead of "sexy" ones. Just beautifully composed, beautifully lit, artistically conceived shots.

    Well put - and I'd agree. In my world I see many pics of top predators / exotic species where the overall pic quality / impact has been traded for a hoped for 'wow' factor associated with the subject rather than the basics of a good overall image.

    Personally, I'd much rather take a decent shot of a 'boring /common' subject than an inferior shot of something 'exotic' ... especially if the former is (more or less) on my doorstep :)

    pp
    Website

    Flickr
  • Options
    divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited July 26, 2013
    puzzledpaul wrote: »
    Well put - and I'd agree. In my world I see many pics of top predators / exotic species where the overall pic quality / impact has been traded for a hoped for 'wow' factor associated with the subject rather than the basics of a good overall image.

    pp

    15524779-Ti.gif

    THIS. Exactly. (and I have three fingers pointing back at myself, Steve - this is not only applicable to your work!)
    facebook | photo site |
  • Options
    BilsenBilsen Registered Users Posts: 2,143 Major grins
    edited July 28, 2013
    Okay, Diva, Hack and Paul I'm gonna try to figure out what you mean and go shoot it. Will keep you "posted" so to speak. Laughing.gif
    Bilsen (the artist formerly known as John Galt NY)
    Canon 600D; Canon 1D Mk2;
    24-105 f4L IS; 70-200 f4L IS; 50mm 1.4; 28-75 f2.8; 55-250 IS; 580EX & (2) 430EX Flash,
    Model Galleries: http://bilsen.zenfolio.com/
    Everything Else: www.pbase.com/bilsen
  • Options
    jonh68jonh68 Registered Users Posts: 2,711 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2013
    Bilsen wrote: »
    Okay, Diva, Hack and Paul I'm gonna try to figure out what you mean and go shoot it. Will keep you "posted" so to speak. Laughing.gif

    I think what they ae getting at is sometimes the wow factor comes from the subject, not the photograph itself.

    A badly taken picture of a bald eagle will get wows because of the subject.

    An awesome picture of a house sparrow can get a wow factor because the photographer took the time to wait for the light and the moment.

    Same with shooting portraits. A very good looking subject can get wows regardless of the photographer. A great portrait photographer can get wows regardless of the subject. When you get a well composed/lit photograph combined with a great looking subject it is off the charts.
    www.jonimages.com
Sign In or Register to comment.