Untitled

I have no problem with striving for perfection. I do it everytime I take a photo. I try to get the perfect exposure,the perfect lighting, the perfect composition, the perfect print. Most times I fall far short of perfection. With this photo you do not. Would the photo be better in some viewers eyes if there was a flaw in the model? A giant wart on the side of her nose, a hot spot in the lighting? I think not, this photo is about as good as it gets for this type of photo. Even no emotion, is a emotion. Congratulations on a beautiful photograph, and your pick as a POW.

What Marc G. said. I know that sounds trite but I honestly cannot imagine that I could say it any better.

Joanna clearly set out to create a very specific look with this photo and the entire folder and she has achieved her aim without flaw. This same attention to detail carries through to her other work, including the more personal and emotionally expressive , but no less impeccable, portraits in her wonderful B&W folder.

I think this work has charm. It is not powerful. It is not expressive and doesn't jump out at one. It has a subdued quality that even understates the use of color to a bare minimum but enough to make it interesting and soft and a garland to the effort of detail in the photographer who took such care in her subject. It is not a work for every portraitist. I probably am not temperamentally adapted to this look, but I can admire it. And I do,Joanna. It is certain to be seen through all kinds of mental filters. I call it a talented approach. And worthy of discussion of course.

I would really like to know what gear was used,for this image,sorry unkown is not a brand I'm familier with!!

I had seen this picture in the “Paintings” category, but I don’t think this picture is close to a painting. A painting is very close to a photograph – emphasize “lighting”, but the difference is in a painting, an artist can control “lighting” by his brushes, but in photography, an artist have to actually using lights. Why do artists emphasize “lighting”? One purpose of “lighting” is to emphasize main subjects! If you look at this picture everything is very “clear” – her face features, her clothes and so on. If you look at a real painting, you will find in a painting some part of a painting is very “clear”, such as a person’s eyes, and some part of a painting is very “blur”, such as a person’s ears. The reason why I said this picture doesn’t look like a painting at all because I think this picture didn’t handle important information very well – some part should be in “focus” and some part should be “blur” - especially you could use Photoshop to achieve this effect!

First of all congratulations to you Joanna on becoming the latest POW recipient. I've often found your work to be technically very sound, accurate and something that exemplifies your obvious skill and talent (this is even more evident in your B&W pics where the absence of colour can often make it hard to achieve such high standards). This image is no exception in exemplifying that skill and talent and serves to showcase your style of work to PN. That said, what this photo makes up in technical brilliance and style, I feel it lacks in feeling and/or mood. I realise the intent here isn't so much to set a feeling or mood per-se or even to represent a portrait of human emotion and spirit; but when I look at some of your other work (where I think you HAVE captured emotion and feeling) I think a better choice from your works could have been made by the elves IMHO. I do acknowledge that sometimes the elves choose to showcase technical brilliance and so once again I congratulate your achievement in becoming a POW recipient

Just remember if you emphasize your style, but can not express your information clearly, the style equals nothing…

nice portrait.........but it is not raw...........so it is brilliant and good details..i wish u the best.bobby

I am confused...I just photographed 20 oil paintings for a client...so what are those images now? paintings or photographs?
One thing I am sure of... is that you and Marcin the make-up/stylist have created art...This is another awesome addition in the whole series ...
Your work is the kind that makes me want to spend time with it. I hope your time making these images was as much fun...
Looking over your portfolio again...I believe that you believe in your style...and it works.
Portraits that are painterly with soul is how I describe your art to my freinds...congrats and I look forward to more...juan

Only thing that worries me a little bit is her hands. The colour doesn't really seem to belong to her. They look a bit old for her face and shoulder.

Other than that a brilliant picture.

This is just to answer Juan’s question : That are neither paintings nor photographs, and that are photo copies of paintings.

Is this answer right?

You can delete this comment if this answer is not right…

All well and good. Executed with great control. And that's my issue. I love the flaws that make us human, and these images seem to be of mannequins or really pretty robots. If I was able to make money doing it, I would. I don't consider it art, I consider it artful.

I like people's idiosyncracies too much to find this homogenous treatment appealing (personally), except as a commercial venture.

Hopefully you can find lots of clients that want this treatment and you can earn a good living with your skills (maybe you are, already).

Congratulations on the refinement of your technique and for whatever value you can derive from this recognition on photo.net... t

This is a picture of a model in many frills and furbelows. The dress seems large for her slender frame, her very perfect features show no expression, and she sits there like a little doll. The dress looks slightly rumpled, as if she had been dressed in haste, and the lace bodice is dragged down slightly, showing bra and bra strap underneath.
The statement here is complete, detailed, expressive, and the tone is ironic. A pity to be overwhelmed by details of appearance, and perforce to suppress one's individuality as of no consequence. If I have any criticism, it is that the point is a little belabored, but apparently it was not belabored enough.

I like this photo, especially this model’s expression. So if it were me, the model’s face would be my view point. So what I would like to do is how to emphasize this view point. I also like this photo’s “green” tone. Let’s see what else distracting my view point. The first thing I noticed is the red ribbon closed to her hand, which distracting my attention a lot, so I would let her hand rest in her shoulder, so that the red ribbon close to her face, and her fingers in some way point to her face, beside that it also hides some part of her clothes, which not causes too much attentions…

I think is a wonderful shot, very elegant and beatiful colors, congratulations

I think this shot is a combination of portraiture and fashion photography. From portraiture side, probably I would more consider how to use DOF; from fashion side, probably I would more consider how to use lighting. I am learning photography, so I just try how to learn from this shot…

This is perfect as pose, as colors, as composition. All is really perfect.
The model is a beautiful lady and sure the photographer has great skills.
But I'm really sorry, for me, this syle of image is kitsch and not my cup of tea. This is only my humble opinion and if needed, give my apologizes.

Exquisite taste in composing this great image, everything is carefully assembled -the pose, the light, the detail of the red ribbon, etc.- in order to create a balanced and magical portrait.

Interesting light/photo shop work but the model looks lifeless. How about an alternate take from the shoot where she actually looks alive? I doubt very much if this was a portrait of a man you would have him looking so stiff.

A few weeks ago I wrote a letter to my respected photographer, and in the letter I wrote: “I started to learn photography not too long ago, but I had 5 years of training of drawing and painting about thirty years ago. I always wonder what a difference between a painting and a photograph. If I shot a picture looks like a painting, probably I would never beat a painting. I just want to find a best way to suit for myself.” I think Joanna’s approaching in this picture is good, and probably the problem is how to combine painting and photography together, especially how to use photography advantages or techniques in this picture is not so clear…

When I look at this I see the clothing. The model is there to purely make the clothing look good, and she is modeling it well. To me it seems like it was a commissioned piece where the costume/fashion designer crafted these clothes and had a specific vision of how he/she wanted them displayed. I think that is a very creative idea to make them look like old Victorian paintings to match the feel of the clothing. Due to the deliberate fluidity in the costumes for all the models in this series, I truly believe this was a commissioned piece. I really doubt Joanna just had this lying around for an opportunity to use them in a photograph…maybe she did, but I don’t think so.


So I can’t fault her on the costume choice, as I really don’t feel she had much control over it. Plus, I just love the clothing. Who would think to put these materials together in such a way…I am just in awe. Making all these textures, be in such harmony with one another. Having the dress off the shoulder just brings the softness and delicateness of the material out even more. The pink ribbon mirrors the pink in her lips and cheeks; same as the orange feathers, and orange beading. The fingernails aren’t distracting at all, if you think so, you are just being picky. That is probably THE last thing you look at, when you look at this photo. The color choice mimics the color of the gem in the brooch, and goes with the other dresses she wore as well, so that was probably the idea behind that color choice. For me as a painter, that is what I do, I would take colors from one area, and just hide it in other areas in the painting to make the viewers eye move around the painting and not have one specific area stand out due to color choice, unless that was my intention.


Now as far as being too perfect with the skin and lighting etc…I think that is a bunch of baloney. If she had managed to create a weird shadow because of incorrect lighting and because of that it would have made the image better…I don’t think so. That flaw would have been the one thing everyone would focus on and would say it would be better without it. And agin, this image is about the clothing not the model. We all strive to achieve perfect lighting on our pieces, so I don’t fault her for actually doing so. I also don’t feel that Joanna over processed this piece at all. When you look at the other images of this model, especially the close ups, you can see that in real life, she does indeed have flawless skin. And why wouldn’t she? That is just something that models need to have in the business. In this piece you can still see the little hairs on her arms. Because she is farther away it’s hard to see the details on her face, but in the close ups on her and the other models, the post processing is the same, you can see pores, and little hairs and folds in the eyes. She may have softened it a bit to add to the painterly effect but I think its’ the clothes and lighting that really create the painting feel. It does have a porcelain doll feel to it, but for me, personally, I like it, and think it was a good choice to go in that direction. It allowed the clothes to speak for themselves, and allowed us to experience the clothing details without any interruption.


As far as painting or photograph, which one is it…I’m sorry but not all photographs are documentary photographs. A lot of photographers want to try to create a certain feel/emotion, meaning behind a photograph, or to execute a style/vision. Next thing you might say is that photography is not art. I believe it is. There was a vision going into this series, and I believe she executed it perfectly. Having any sort of texture added on top of the photograph would have affected the clothing textures and that would have been a mistake, which is why she didn't. If I was her client I would be absolutely ecstatic and over the moon about the end product.


I feel if the models eyes were looking at us, it may have been a more powerful image. But maybe the designer didn’t want all the power given to the model and just wanted the clothes to be the ones to speak and draw you in. For me, in all the pieces, I kind of graze over the models and then just inspect every fold, and every texture and color in each costume. The models aren’t the focus, the clothing is. I’m sure Joanna had the model in many different poses, looking at us, profile, hands up by her shoulder/face, hands down, on hips, etc…And this was the one they settled on. What’s amazing is that she managed to still keep it as a photograph and yet make it look like a painting. Joanna is probably one of THE photographers in pnet that I constantly reference back to. I would love to achieve something as beautiful and well executed as this. Well done!

I don’t think this shot is for clothing, and if it is for clothing, I would be more focus on clothing instead on the model’s face… apparently Joanna was trying to reduce clothing effect in this shot, but couldn’t…

Sometimes a black and white picture of a household pet can be more interesting than an 11 x 14 color print from someone's trip to the Himalayas. When I first glanced at this photo, I was thinking of the latter, but it truly pulls you in when you lock on her eyes. It's absolutely "too perfect" ... but that in itself provides a heck of a statement and it's kind of riveting. The perfection is such that she doesn't look real. She looks a little a mannequin. BUT .... the eyes and face are so doll-like that you have to wonder whether there is a little more of a message intended in this. From my humble opinion, this is really great work!

As I read all the responses to this thread, i am intrigued that no one has picked up on the fact that this photographer has had no formal training and is only 25 years old. I personally am impressed that with no training or school to teach her about lighting, shadows etc, that she can produce such good pictures. I also viewed all the shots and I personally think that the work is very good. Not my taste, however as artist and photographers it is the image that we are critiquing, lighting, the exposure and so on. Not so much the cloths, the look on the face of the model, or the red ribon that catches the eye of someone. The overall shot is good. The lighting, the pose, the tone. Is that not what we are here to do is judge the shot and not try to guess what and why the photographer took the picture and if she was aware of something being wrong. Well, that is my 2 cents. I think that for 25 years old and no photography education this girls is doing a fantastic job and producing quality work. Linda

I have to admit that only after reading Linda's insightful comments did I go back and pay attention to Joanna's biography (although I have viewed and commented on her works previously). I agree with your assesment Linda, Joanna is talented, skilful and a well rounded photographer. I admire her technical brilliance in this shot (as I do many others in her collection), however I reiterate my earlier comments that there is a sense of purposeful lifelessness in this shot that I don't necessarily have an issue with but am suprised that the elves chose it over her other works.