C&C Please....

Barefoot and Natural

I really love this shot and want to know what others think...
This is just the begining of a shoot I did for Maternity portraits and I am really excited about the turn out.

Would love to hear your thoughts!
Thanks,
Heather

photogmomma

I don't see a picture... did I miss something?

ETA: Ahh! After I post, there it is. DOH!

Very nice! I'm a bit distracted by her arm behind her belly.... I keep thinking she needed to cover up until I realize that it's an arm! ! Maybe a closer crop? Or can you show all of her?

This has some very nice lighting.... Nice shot!

Scott_Quier

Photogmomma - the picture's there, I had to do a refresh of my browser window to get it to appear.

Heather, I really like this shot too. It's really hard to find anything wrong with it, but I tried and tried and finally found something - Just above her belly I see what looks like an arm, as in she's leaning against the wall with her arm supporting her. Very mildly distracting.

I really like this shot!

Barefoot and Natural

Thanks you both!! I didn;t even notice that! This is why I come to this place! Forget the second pair of eyes.....you get hundreds here!

I did a tighter crop and I like it even more!!

Thanks again,
Heather

System

Subject matter aside it's a nice pic that I'm sure the mother will love. As the others have said the arm is a bit distracting. The photo is also rather soft and the DOF seems to be on the watch and far tooo narrow. The belly and clothes seems a bit overexposed which is tricky with so much white and natural light. I think I'd cnvert to B&W to reduce the skin tone noise as well.

Allright...I gotta come out and say it. This trend of photographing exposed pregnant bellys is ridiculous. I have no interest in seeing the distended belly of a stranger. While this might be a sentimental family picture it has no place on the cover of magazines and billboards as has become the case. Would you like me to post pics of my midriff after I eat 2 double cheeseburgers, cheddar fries a super sized Cherry Coke and a hot fudge sundae? I see no difference just because there is a fetus in place of a meal. Sonograms are far more appealing as they show the child, not the distorted body the child causes.

System

awe contrary, moan amy-

I beg to disagree; at least, with what is my opinion-

the pregnant belly is a natural phenomenon and in no way is a distended belly (in the sense of obesity or illness)-

your belly, or even worse, mine, after a disaster of a meal from a fast food horror house should in no way be compared to what is many times a product of love (at least, wouldn't one hope so) and is a natural condition-

I do not consider a pregnant belly a distortion-

I do agree that I like the ultrasounds better, but that may be because I am an ultrasound tech-

I appreciate the fact that you're expressing your views, and there are probably many that feel the same way you do-

I'm not trying to be pc; I'm not trying to be holier-than-thou; I just want my opinion to be known-

Barefoot and Natural

truth wrote:

Subject matter aside it's a nice pic that I'm sure the mother will love. As the others have said the arm is a bit distracting. The photo is also rather soft and the DOF seems to be on the watch and far tooo narrow. The belly and clothes seems a bit overexposed which is tricky with so much white and natural light. I think I'd cnvert to B&W to reduce the skin tone noise as well.

Allright...I gotta come out and say it. This trend of photographing exposed pregnant bellys is ridiculous. I have no interest in seeing the distended belly of a stranger. While this might be a sentimental family picture it has no place on the cover of magazines and billboards as has become the case. Would you like me to post pics of my midriff after I eat 2 double cheeseburgers, cheddar fries a super sized Cherry Coke and a hot fudge sundae? I see no difference just because there is a fetus in place of a meal. Sonograms are far more appealing as they show the child, not the distorted body the child causes.

Thank you for your comments on the photo itself.


Now the actual belly itself has background!
This woman has had MANY miscarriages and was told with her last one, she had a 10% chance of carrying a full term baby.
She is due in 3 weeks and at her last ultra sound was told the baby appeared to be in PERFECT condition and so this is an very exciting time for this family...(second marriage....stepmom of two children).

But even if a soon-to-be mother did not have this history with pregnancies, the joy of being able to create another human life and glow with the happiness of it, would make any woman love to be photographed.

If you ever get married (or if you already are) and this woman that you will adore forever and cherish, becomes pregnant with the love that you both created.......I sure hope that you never tell her that you do not want to see the distorted belly the child causes!
That might cause a damper in the joy of carrying your child.

Heather

Richard

Barefoot and Natural wrote:

Would love to hear your thoughts!
Thanks,
Heather

Heather,

It looks just a little over-exposed to me. I didn't know that pregnant belly shots were controversial. I must make a note to try to get out more often. The one thing that gives me pause in this one is that there is no head attached to the body. Perhaps you are making some point here , but I do find it a bit strange. You got the belly fine, but I would like to see a face as well.

Cheers,

Barefoot and Natural

Here is the original shot.....I did not catch that her eyes were not completely open....so I just cropped and used the belly for this proof.
And I am learning still how keep the background in mind also, not just the person and didn't realize how distracting the brown shelf was.

I basically tried to save what I could of this shot.

Thank you for commenting
Heather

photogmomma

Barefoot and Natural wrote:

Thank you for your comments on the photo itself.


Now the actual belly itself has background!.....That might cause a damper in the joy of carrying your child.

Heather

Excellent response...

rsinmadrid wrote:

The one thing that gives me pause in this one is that there is no head attached to the body. Perhaps you are making some point here , but I do find it a bit strange.

I have another board that I get on with only women and I see belly shots without heads quite a bit. While they bug me a bit, too (and I harrass the women that get them done - we know each other well) I ended up liking several that I had done of myself - much to my surprise. I have come to like belly shots without the head that are tight crops - like this one. I dislike them when they are cropped at the neck. Disturbing to me! ! I think this one works well, though.

As for the last photo posted, it would have been quite a nice shot if her eyes hadn't been partially closed - or if they had been closed all the way. (I would have suggested PSing out the shelf.) I think your crop was an excellent way to save the photo and I'm sure the mother will be quite pleased!

Barefoot and Natural

photogmomma wrote:

Excellent response...

(I would have suggested PSing out the shelf.)

I tried to PS it out (I have Corel right now) but it looked horrible!! You could totally tell that something was butchered!!

Practice practice practice.....still trying to learn!!

Thank you for your comments......

Heather

System

Barefoot and Natural wrote:

Thank you for your comments on the photo itself.

If you ever get married (or if you already are) and this woman that you will adore forever and cherish, becomes pregnant with the love that you both created.......I sure hope that you never tell her that you do not want to see the distorted belly the child causes!

That might cause a damper in the joy of carrying your child.

Heather

I said that I understand these photos as joyus family momentos, what I disagree with is the public display just for the sake of it. It's almost a risque we are so on the edge type thing for magazines and ad copy. I find it distasteful. As art, in a larger contex it can also work, but it needs a deeper meaning, to tell a story in which the belly is only one part. A pregnant belly on it's own is nothing more than that, a pregnant belly.


Gefillmore ~ there are plenty of natural human states that I have no desire to see.

System

'Gefillmore ~ there are plenty of natural human states that I have no desire to see.'

your prerogative-

as far as natural states- I can think of none that would repulse me-

but since we're only talking about pregnancy, I find it a wonderful process with all aspects, if not lovely, definitely interesting-

Scott_Quier

truth wrote:

I said that I understand these photos as joyus family momentos, what I disagree with is the public display just for the sake of it. It's almost a risque we are so on the edge type thing for magazines and ad copy. I find it distasteful. As art, in a larger contex it can also work, but it needs a deeper meaning, to tell a story in which the belly is only one part. A pregnant belly on it's own is nothing more than that, a pregnant belly.


Gefillmore ~ there are plenty of natural human states that I have no desire to see.

It is my opinion that the display of the human pregnant belly may be, for many, a social statement; for others a statement of celebration, as in this particular case.

Please remember back about 20 years ago when it was a rare thing to even see an expectant mother that was not trying to HIDE her condition. I can remember being surprised the first time I saw a woman on The Weather Channel in the expectant condition and thinking to myself, "Finally, an enlightened public forum!"

There seems to be a social stigma associated with the natural state, an association that is slowly being eroded. MAYBE, the trend to display the pregnant belly is a statement of rebellion against that stigma, proclaiming this condition to not only be natural, but beautiful.