Untitled

It leaves me cold but I think that's appropriate since this is a picture of yet another Ice Princess. Her skin looks unreal and porcelain like a doll which makes her cold to the touch. Besides if you touched her you would mess her make-up. She has that supposedly edgy but irritating I'm-pretty-and-you're-not expression. Whatever she's selling I don't want any. I don't doubt this could be used to success in a fashion mag but I think it's just average even in that category. The large signature across the bottom is pretentious.

Exposition of the truth is one of the primary functions of the artist. See John Keats. I realize this may run counter to the world of advertising but artists, even commercial artists who perpetuate the culture of lies are unoriginal in the extreme. I don't care how aesthetic a photo looks on the surface if, at its foundation, it lies to me, I'm outta there.

If the pic was in a mag, I wouldn't be buying the advertised product and skip to the next page. I don't agree with the comment on photographic competence. It has a fabulous set up I wouldn't be able to do myself but it completely lacks any appeal.

 

It's not only about a social message, it is also about the lack of any anchor or invitation to another world to explore. Nothing that makes my fantasy soar or imagine something else. I like fashion photography when it's well done, but this is not the case... and it has some an '80s look that I don't like at all.

Love the photo, however i think that you need to think a little more about the lighting of the left eye, i feel that the way that it is at the moment is that it is quite distracting from the rest of the photo, other than that wonderful!

I'm going against the grain, I guess. I wholly appreciate the lighting. The mood. The technical finesse in post. The MUA. AND, I think the rest of the photog's portfolio (on website) is great - the skill shown in the specular highlights in the food shots, the comps in the fashion shots, the color management in ALL of her work...

 

The critical nature of many above seems to want to find flaws, and in some cases (as shown above) label things as "vapid," but my perspective is that I don't think I know of a single photographer on this site, nor have I in 5 years, that produces such a broad range of successful images, commerical though they may be, as illustrated on her website.

 

Which brings my thoughts to this: What's "successful" photography to you? To me? To the next guy? To the client? To the editor? My guess is that the maker of the POW thinks a successful image is one that pays her bills. . .which also means she's likely doing well in the eyes of the client and editor, the opinions that matter immediately.

 

Congrats on POW, Encone - I couldn't make that shot if I tried, and freely admit it. Great model, great lighting, great shot!

Thanks to everybody for honest and detailed opinion about this image! It hirts but it is great way to learn for me as a beginner in photography. I will appriciate any professional opinion on my other work too...

The image wasn't made to sell anything. It was an example of a makeupartist work for her portfolio.

Elena Cone

Congratz for POW. I dont think the skin tone is Desaturated. It has a cold feel to it but that how it should look in a low light or moon light atmosphere. Very well done.

If this shot is designed to feature the skills of a makeup artist, it would be interesting to know what the photographer's role is in presenting her work to prospective clients. How do they know where the makeup ends and the PS skills start?

OK, So reading all of this a few things came to mind.

 

First, the comment "what the photographer's role is in presenting her work to prospective

clients. How do they know where the makeup ends and the PS skills start?" really caught

my attention. The reality is that you don't need to address any of it with the client. The

client only wants to know that the image can be created within the budget allotted.

 

The photographer is like the director/producer of a movie. They are responsible for hiring

the "right" people to get a job done, which might include makeup artists and retouchers. I

think this website might be instructional in answering this question. http://

www.amydresser.com/retouch.html (Wait for the images to fully download and then roll

your mouse over the photo to see the before shot.) This type of work is the norm in

almost all commercial work these days--even landscape work.

 

 

 

 

second, the photo is not necessarily my favorite of Elena's, but it is competently done. In

fact, as compared to most of the "glamour/fashion" work I have seen on PN it pretty much

exceeds all others as to the styling, which is essential in this type of work. The makeup is

applied well for this setting, the hair is done well and the feathers blend very well with the

hair--essentially everything is in it's place. Whether you like the styling or not seems to

be more a matter of taste than execution. That does not mean that there are not a few

things that should be retouched--one example is the white spots(chapped skin?) at center

of lips below

septum, but at least this isn't a major overhaul. ( Just a note, Elena currently has a shot of

this model in neutral, bright light on her home page. In that shot, this makeup is almost

hideous--just shows that makeup needs to be designed for the shot!)

 

As to lighting, I think this does create a strong mood as I think has been written here, I

find nothing wrong with the technique or the way the image falls off. I might retouch a

few things, but that would largely depend on how big it was going to be used and how

those things read.

 

When there is a model involved, a lot of the success of the shot is in how you relate to the

model. This is not only how the model is posed and her energy, but also how you

psycologically respond to the personality you are seeing. From the 3 shots I have seen of

this model, I would rank her about average, which is not very good for this type of work--

seems a bit too tentative. Sometimes the photographer can't get more from the model.

 

The problem with this type of shot is that we want to compare it to what we have seen in

magazines or whereever. What we have to remember is that a shot like this done for a

major makeup company would easily have a budget in the range of $50,000-100,000 US,

which would include retouching (and maybe not even the model's fees) Half of the budget

would

be the photographer's creative fee and the rest would be the expenses--multiple

assistants and stylists-probably 3 stylists on a shot like this-hair/makeup/props--a

fourth would be added if there was wardrobe. The props stylist might have 3 or 4 days in

shopping for the "right" feathers. These props might have to be made. The budget would

also include a retoucher like the one above to take the photo beyond what can be done in

camera. Sometimes work is done by someone the photographer hires and more is done

by the client. So my point is that when we see a shot like this, let's have some perspective

as to what we are judging it against.

 

Overall, I think Elena is doing nice work in her niche--beginning model photographer--

and better than most I see out there. Her portfolio has some very well done shots and

others that probably compromise those better ones--still good, but not up to that level.

So the question would be where do you want to go and are you willing to make the

changes to get there.

really COooOL !

privet vo neojidanno tebya sdez vstretit !

Pozdravlyau s Photograph of the Week !

I have not gone to Elena's website or her PN portfolio. If this is a photo to advertise the make up I would be looking at just this one picture on the magazine page or on the advertising poster. So, let's go with an amateur's opinion on whether this would entice me to buy the make up.

 

The green lighting or shimmer added to the lips do not make me wish to put that on my lips. To me, it makes her look deathly cold or just deathly. The spot on her lip just above the lip line has been mentioned and could perhaps be brushed out, either physically or in the darkroom.

 

I think the extension of the darker green and blue of the make up into the inner eye cavity makes her eye an odd shape. It makes that part of her eye look puffy. I think a lighter treatment of the colors in that area would be better and would make her eye more almond shaped and more appealing. Same with the line on the bottom of her eye. I think that heavy dark line should only go about 3/4 of the way towards the inner eye, where it should thin out, lighten and disappear before reaching the inner eye. I guess the photographer has no control over that, since she is just shooting the make up as is.

 

The make up makes a spot on her nose look shiny and on the edge of her lips as well. I do not know if that is the make up, but I find it to be a bit of a glare compared to the darker aspects or the mood that seems to be created by the darker parts of the model's skin.

 

I can see a distinct line between the dark and the light areas on her face. I don't understand why the lighting would show such a marked difference, especially on her neck. And then it is very light under parts of her hair and the ear lobe where it might naturally be more dark and in shadow.

 

I do not understand what showing a bit of the dark side of her face does for the whole image. This model may well be best in side profile view.

 

With this dark lighting I would like something mysterious or romantic in the background (just barely discernable) to give some reason for the sharply dark/light lines to her face. Or is she meant to look tragic, vulnerable?

I would have killed to have this photograph in my portfolio when I was in the business all those years ago. I know many top agencies who would pick this model up in a heartbeat. Nice job.

I won't argue with matters of taste here, but I will argue with some of the "technical" lighting and make-up stuff that I read on this page, Here goes:

 

I think a cold picture with cold colors and colder than normal skin tones will often indeed give some kind of deathly look.

 

This is agreed. But to me, that's quite interesting, and really nothing unusual in fashion and beauty photography.

 

One needs to consider that Bright spots are not ALWAYS, not NECESSARILY a bad thing. I've even had entire sessions where the client was asking for such shiny areas on the face.

 

It doesn't seem perfect. But again, how sure are we that the line stopping mid of an eye in not the latest fashion in terms of eye-liners ? :-)

 

Dark moods with shine are a VERY trendy thing in fashion photography. See example attached: the client for this was a "Health & Beauty" magazine. The client's request was: silver foundation & shiny make-up to catch the light. Please note it is a dark mood shot too, and please note her arms - they are obviously covered with silver foundation as well.

 

 

As for the lips, this is a called a "gloss", with paillettes added in: a perfectly standard way to GET THE LIPS TO SHINE (while decorating them), precisely; so who are we to complain about shining lips, and are we sure we want to reform make-up trends...?

 

Some aspects of an image like this may not be familiar to you, but are nothing really unusual in the world of fashion photography. I just thought that needed to be said.

I wish I could soften my previous remarks. It's not fair of me to bring my expectations to your picture. You did not intend any symbolic statement with your picture and there is no intent to portray some significant truth. I have to own that as my expectation and it's inappropriate to impose my expectations on your photo. It is purely an example for your portfolio and I think it is an attractive example and accomplishes much. The repeating shades of deep blue from the peacock feather is very nicely done. I wish you had worked with the model longer to achieve a more inviting and less distancing expression. And I think your signature across the bottom appears to pretend to be on the level of a Vogue back cover when, by your own admission, you are a beginner. I wonder if you would not be more successful to have a distinctive style. It's an uphill battle for you to compete with the shooters for Banana Republic or Guess or Vogue using their style.

The interesting thing about this shot is that the client is the makeup artist, so my question was how much post processing should be done on the image considering that it's supposed to feature the makeup rather than the model, poses, wardrobe, etc?

Marc's point about showing only finished work is a

good one. Most stylists try to show their finished work--it is all about credibility. Sure

you might want to see the "raw" shot, but if you work with, or even talk to,

most makeup artists, you know pretty quick how good they are! And you rarely hire an

unknown stylist for the most important jobs--you try them out on tests. You also get

great ones you don't know through referral from people you respect and can rely on in the

industry. In this case, anyway, we are not being shown the image by the makeup artist,

but by the photographer and that is what is important here.

 

Also, just back to my original point here. There will always be touch up, but it shouldn't

have to be rebuilding the makeup. The shine on the upper lip, on the skin, should be

retouched, as possibly should be the one below the lower lip etc. But these are minor and

probably should have been done before this image was posted. But this might not be the

makeup, or it might be that the model pursed her mouth in such a way the moisture or

gloss got on the skin--not visible while shooting. You don't trash a shot just because of

these nits, they are too easily fixed in PS! In fact, if I was shooting and saw these, but had

a rhythm going with the model, I would not break it for such a small thing--that is one of

the calls you have to make as the photographer-- you weigh the options.

It is really great for me to read this discussion here! I am very thankfull to eveyrbody who has time to tell me theor opinion. really! I do not think I ever had that much attantion to any of my images. I am going to use this chanse and ask you guys to visit my website maybe help me to see my work more realisticly and remove some of the images I do not need. Especially you, Mona Chrome. You were so kind to review my website . Maybe you can tell me what do I need to improve? I am totally selftought and sometimes I really need professionale advice.

Thank you!!!

very good photo-colors

Very good pic, for sure)

But i don`t like her blue-colored teeth and white (of girl`s eyes).

The colors are amazing, her expression is very nice and the head-dress is fabulous, but, for a fashion photo, her face is a bit shiny and looks like it could have used some good old photoshop.

Very good use of light in this photo...and the make up alltogether with the expressive model makes this image amasing!

Those who see photography as purely a mechanical thing all about f-stops, shutter speeds and focal lengths will have problems with shots like these.

Every time you compose a scene or frame a subject you are creating art and make no mistake photography is art, and this shot is a work of art.

The blue skin tone is in sync with the peacock feathers. There is more than photography here. I wud aprreciate the person who did the makeup. The lady is as a peacock here. Saludos...

Very Outstanding photo. Keep it up

wow! thats really great!