Untitled

AS Mark Fox endes up with " ... a bare shoulder looks great, but a bare armpit -WELL!"

But I'm surprised nobody else noticed the big problem with the bare armpit, which absolutely destroys all this VERY nice work! Nobody is really paying attention to where their eye keeps getting drawn to, but it's a necessity to pay attention to where the eye goes, and not to only what the brain says, or you will never be able to 'fix' your own art. The eye always goes to the flesh (don't ask me why, just realize it does), and your 'eye' has a seperate function in that your brain can not stop it from going where IT wants. Now stand back, watch your eye scan this image, and REALLY pay attention to where your eye travels to, and where it keeps traveling back to once you try to look at other parts of the image (meaning not the armpit). It won't take long and you are back at it.

By the way, it's why 'no bare armpits' is one of the portrait rules you should know, and this is a perfect example of why.

No arguing the detail in the dress, particularly the lacing in the dress from the midsection down. I have to disagree with the comment on the bare arm pit in that it is quite erotic. The posing of the arms however appear to be stressed and are not flowing in the same direction as the main part of the body. It's then that the use of the black gloves appear to be detached and separate forming a triangulation with the model's head. Personally I feel drawn in more on a personal level by the other poses in the portfolio including shadows on the backdrop but can see how this same method used in the presenting photo would be too distracting and complicate the photographer vision. That he's is able to do this arrangement and switch effortlessly in introducing the shadows in subsequent shots to his advantage shows his competence in changing scenes and lighting to his favor. Very well done.

Great pose, i like!