"Narcissa"

For those who call this kitchy: I say that it is so self-consciously, confidently, exhuberently kitchy that it becomes a comment on kitch while remaining a finely made and beautifull creation. In other words, it crosses over into happy post-modernism.

Interesting thread. Good point about the kitschy look, Edward.

Looks like a lot of time and effort and there is some nice geomatry in there, however I do find it too clean and a little cheesy overall. The camera may have been horizontal but the reeds in the background make the horizon look unstraight. The tree I feel also confuses and distracts from the image in the fact that it is behind and not to the side of it, I appreciate its contrast to the subject but not its placement. Great idea and definatley the elements that would for me make a stunning image, but not quite there, for me at least. Sorry I didn't just out and out praise you but how useful is that really, you know you're good.

I have a problem with this shot because there are several things "out of place" in my opinion. The degree of contrast between the subject and the beach and the background is far too polarizing. The mud and the brush take away from the supposed delicate form. And about that form...very over the top.

I cannot argue abut the technical aspect of the picture (it is far beyond my level anyway) but as for the mood- it does not work for me. I am not sure how to describe it -it just feels too real for the "dreamy angel shot" it meant(?) to be. It is too sharp, light is too perfect and the model's posture lacks spontaneity.

I showed the image to my wife and her impression regarding the reflection is the same as mine... that it creates a sense of imbalance in the overall composition. In other words, the angel is gorgeous and the reflection is not. The POW comment flow is always an interesting phenomenon, with some people oriented towards wires, others to kitsch, etc. I would have been interested to see a perfectly clear reflection on placid water, or the angel posed on a grass knoll, or some other variation(s). Almost cropped the photo, but decided to just do that with a piece of paper.

 

Again, the main subject is absolutely fantastic... in all respects. -Greg-

It's fun. it's of the "Studio Manasse" genre. It is what it is. The draping in the tree balances the overall flowing of the compositon. It's a pictoral creation, what's not to like. Of course it's not Peragino's Flagelation of Christ either, but what is.

The side lighting is well done, but . . .

 

If you're going to do setups like this, it's a good idea to have several favorite spots picked out ahead of time that offer a more aesthetically pleasing backdrop than this one. Nothing in this backdrop helps the shot - not the grass, mud, or trees. I would be looking for a more formal garden or park somewhere.

 

I would also pay close attention to her hands. The angle of the hand on the left makes it look stumpy. The other one seems to be holding up her garment.

 

I would also like to see at least part of her face and a bit of attention to her hair.

 

The pros spend hours and big bucks and hire specialists to attend to all this issues. Even if this is a budget shoot, I'd still use the same check list.

I did not want a "pretty" location. I spent a week finding this place... and yes, her hand IS

holding up her garment AND the angel wings (which are on a floor stand behind her... you

figure out a better way to hold those things up with 15 mph winds! ;)

 

my set fell apart 4 times during this shoot (which could only last about 45 mins during the

ideal sunset...)

Windy conditions make the case for false backgrounds in a studio, I guess. I'm sure it occurred to you that you might get lucky and she would just take off!

 

If the client likes the setting, then it's good by definition. From the standpoint of photographic aesthetics, I find the branches near the edges of the frame (three places) very distracting. Again, that may not bother the client, but if you had a different shooting angle, my guess is that they'd prefer the alternate composition (other things being equal), although they may not be able to tell you why they picked the cleaner version.

This is the first POW I felt compelled to comment upon; it just struck me the right way. The lighting does have a Maxfield Parrish feel, and forgive me for being kitschy, but I really like the angel imagery and the allusion to Greek mythology. But more than anything, the lighting is beautiful. I wish I had taken this!

sharpness from london to paris?

I dunno, Stefan. Several others have commented on the long DOF as well, and I can see the case for blurring out the background, but in this case I think that the small aperture and bright light work together to give a sense of realism to an otherwise fantastic image. It is really crisp, all the way down to the fine detail in the feathers. I like it this way, even if it does show the detail in both the foreground and background as well, and not merely on the main subject. It looks like David knows where the sweet spot on that lens is.

 

--Lannie

I do NOT go browsing for angel shots, but since I just posted I went for a spin and this one bounced off my windshield at seven thousand feet:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3800146

 

All of this happened after I awoke from a dream that had Gordon Lightfoot's "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald" playing in the background. Now I can't go back to sleep.

 

Maybe we could institute an Angel Photo forum, a place where one could go to do penance for angelcide.

 

--Lannie

Please note the beatific expression that she wore just before bouncing off my windshield. I know that that is what caught my eye.

 

--Lannie

hard work...good workshop...but not my smack

Great composition and light, bravo!!

Carl, I agree wholeheartedly that the hair could be better, but what's so wrong about this background ? It doesn't distract me at all, and I suppose that the choice of a "dirty" place was meant to havea meaning, in this case. An angel can fall in a palace hotel, yes, but it wouldn't be the same message, would it ? :-)

David... She needs not hold the set. Ideally, she shouldn't, because you'd need her to be and feel free.

 

Since I couldn't tell she was holding it with her hand, I have would thought it was ok, but since Carl apparently found out, maybe this is worth some thoughts...:-)

 

To keep the wings "standing" despite the wind, you'd simply need weights positionned on top of the "feet" of some self-made stand or some ready-made studio stand placed behind the model and hidden by the model and wings. I used to have 2 heavy weights - originally sold with studio boom systems - for such cases; and sometimes, I used additionnal bricks to that effect, if more weights were needed. Regards.

amyway i will not comment about the philosiphy of the picture but rather technical aspect of the picture. The idea is fine , a great one, yeah and the artistic point of view not a bad one. But i fine the subject angel to be very well lit the the rest of the picture it took me a while to satisfy myself that it was not a poor manipulation of picture. The subject looks like a extract from different picture pasted on a picture of a poor wild picture. the background is absolutely dull and does not wear well with the main subject at all. there is too uch happening in the background.

Coming to the pose of the subject it looks very unatural and looks like the girl was really very uncomfortable with the pose.

I think the focus is not right by that i mean not the lense focus. The viewpoint is to close to the subject and the placement of element like the white cloth is not good at all this can be done better. i think the background should have been a green grass land possible under old tree in the wild which will the sense of openess and glory.

I hate the warm light i would rather go for a cool light (blue then warm) a typical morning sense of light.

 

overall this is a good picture but i think u could have put in some more efforts to make it worth millions.

it never ceases to amaze me how much passion you all have in hating this picture... I'm

glad I was able to unite your community for a cause...

not all of us hate this image, my man. But maybe you should try a naked chick in a cowboy hat next time. You'll get great ratings, don't cha know... t

Actually, David, the discussion surrounding this picture has been pretty good in comparison with some past selections. Many other persons have considered the PoW award to be a curse because of the banality of many remarks.

 

--Lannie

I think there are a lot of comments - some constructive critiscm but in the end most people do not *hate* this picture... Perhaps a lot see it with a jealous eye or 'i feel i could do better if only i had thought of it'... unfortunately human nature has a tendency to be negatively judgemental. David : DO NOT give up! - glow in the warmth of the good comments you have received - you have many more than most people!.

This really is an amazing image.

In fact it would be one of the best i've ever seen but for one blatantly obvious mistake -the wings just aren't right.They look like they have a shrinking/wasting disease.
Also that cloth in the background is pointless.Otherwise a stunner,absolutally brilliant