Smoke Girl

Why they say that to smoke is bad? LOL

Very creative.

This is just awful. Technically very well done. Conceptually, one big cliche. Blah.

James, I am impressed with your work! I've always wanted to play with the double exposure features of the 35 mm cam. This is a carefully thought out shot. To work with lighting extremes like this is simply awesome.

You don't have to take pictures yourself to see that this one is one big, awkward, mega-old cliché. Naked, blond and combined with a phallus symbol - that's how women have always loved to be seen by men, haven't we?! Sex with a seductive young lady as a relaxing dessert - old man's dream.

 

Mr. Featherstone, I go with your opinion. Don't feel insulted by Mr. Knowles' rude remark. It is as embarrasing as his photo.

I give up - you're both right! That's EXACTLY what I was thinking when I met this woman it was just that same old tired cliche all real men throughout the eons have dreamt about over and over! "Me man - want pretty woman ... and cigar after!"

 

Sheeesh! What WAS I thinkin'!!!!!!!! SO SORRY to have offended those of you who don't create pictures or just want to see nice pictures of kitties and flowers and little children playing! Truly - I mean that with all my heart!

 

And the next time any woman wants to pose for a picture so I can experiment with some interesting photographic techniques I'll make sure she keeps all her clothes on so that the right wing fundamentalists amongst us won't be offended.

Look pal, you can be faithfully married to one woman for a million years and raise nice kids, have a dog that doesn't fight with the cat, pray to Jesus, etc., etc. -- that doesn't change the fact that this photo is a big fat cliche. Jesus, get over yourself. You're obviously a very good photographer. Why spend time on crap like this?

 

As for my own folder . . . boy, ya got me. I'm an untalented nobody. But I have eyes. And I have a brain.

Let's see you do it.

 

.....or are you too busy with your Cliche Police duties?

 

My cliche is better than your cliche. Nee-ner, nee-ner, nee-ner!

 

 

she's got a kind of dr. evil expression going on. maybe if she held her pinkie up to the corner of her mouth i'd like this image better. beyond the fact that the image is a cliche, and there can be no doubt about that, i fail to see the point here. is this meant to glorify cigars? i've got no problem with that per se, but in that case the image does not accomplish what you wanted it to. but i'm guessing there must be some other point. the fact your message is not immediately clear suggests that your vision here is a bit muddied.

"SO SORRY to have offended those of you who don't create pictures or just want to see nice pictures of kitties and flowers and little children playing." You haven't understood: this picture stands in one line with shallow-brained pictures of kitties and flowers and babies. The blond naked woman who has no other use than to be a dessert for the big guy.

 

And when the simple combination of two shots in PS qualifies as an "interesting technique" for you , so tell me what is interesting here? Its neither new, nor unconventional, nor original and btw not even well-executed. The smoke is too blurred where it is supposed to rise from the ash tray - which it even doesn't. you can clearly see that the smoke comes from BEHIND the tray. What a bad illusion. The graphic artists working in my design studio would be told off if they offered me this.

... you make me HOT - but in a good way!

 

ps... love your kitty pictures!

Oh, you are also experienced in verbal clichés?

Gee whiz, sweetie - if you really look, there are thousands of cliche photos on p.net. Many of them much more blatant examples of the type of objectification you seem to despise so vehemently. The cliche police could go nuts!!!!!

 

I've looked at the photos you've chosen for your portfolio here at p.net. Like I said, nice kitty pictures. Just my opinion, though.

 

See darlin', sometimes cliches are fine. Sometimes boring. Sometimes just nice or pretty and enjoyable to look at for a minute. I find no need to lambast a stranger with my own opinion that they have uploaded a cliche photo of a flower, kitty cat, child playing, abstract of shadows, pretty girls (be they clothed, nude, or rude), etc...

 

Sometimes I offer my humble opinion if I see a photo that shows the photographer has talent, or is on to something interesting or semi-unique. Sometimes I offer a lot of encouragement, even to photographers who are clearly already really really good, and sometimes to those who seem to need a bit of learning and growth. And if I find the need to point out what I feel is a glaring poopie-goof or anything truly bad, I take the time to try and say it in a way that instructs, encourages, and most importantly indicates its just one persons opinion. In other words, Im not rude about it.

 

Occasionally, people here at p.net get a bit pissy and huff themselves up a bit too much and immediately attack others because they dont like something. Usually it just hurts someones feelings a little. Sometimes it results in out&out war. And can you believe it? Some people will actually go and rate someones pictures with 1s and 2s just out of spite! Childish, eh what?

 

Mind you, now that youve enlightened me that you have your own design studio, Im much more impressed with your opinion! And, just my opinion, you look marvelous! Ever do any modeling?

 

Love and kisses, JVK

 

Hm, I am still not sure, whether I should take you seriously or not... er honey pie. You mock the people who react childishly as soon as their photos or comments are not profoundly appreciated. "Occasionally, people here at p.net get a bit pissy and huff themselves up a bit too much and immediately attack others because they dont like something." Isn't this exactly what you did when the first negative comment on your Photo appeared, sweetie?! Look at your own comments here - no single word concerning contents. No serious discussion about the subject. Only insults disguised in funny words. Why do you believe that anybody could be interested in what you think of the people writing here including me? That's SO boring, darling. I'd like to know what you think of your ideas (except for the fact that they are supergreat and megacreative and hothothot) and how you back them up. Intellectually. If you know what I mean. Baby.

 

 

Actually - I find the comments here much more entertaining than the picture.

 

As for your questions, I'll try to answer them best I can.

 

Q. #1. "Occasionally, people here at p.net get a bit pissy and huff themselves up a bit too much and immediately attack others because they don?t like something." (My own words). ...Isn't this exactly what you did when the first negative comment on your Photo appeared, sweetie?!

 

A. #1. Well, let's see. I guess I did sorta react to that whole "THIS IS AWFUL / CRAP" thing. Don't really mind the cliche accusation though. As I believe I tried to convey earlier, whether or not something is a cliche is in the eye of the beholder, eh what? Photo.net has thousands of photos that could easily be called cliches. Not to put too fine a point on it, but one woman's cliche is another man's naked chick! (Which of course is most often somewhat interesting to look at ... for many guys, that is.) Of course I'm being facetious here. Think about it. We are all entitled to our opinions as to what we like and do not. Not sure caring about what someone else likes or dislikes matters all that much here. I have learned, however, that regardless of what one likes / dislikes, it's rarely a cool move to just come right out with an insult when attempting to critique someone's work. Good or bad... the best comment I received here, the one which interpreted the spirit of this picture best (IMHO) was by Jim McNitt above. Really boosted my ego, ya know? Thank you JIM!!! So I stand by my quote above.

 

Q. #2. Why do you believe that anybody could be interested in what you think of the people writing here including me?

 

A. #2. Gee - I dunno. Because it is FUNNY???!!!!!!!!!!! After all, what else is there to discuss - you've pretty much explained to everyone there's nothing worthwhile to learn here about this image. According to you, it's just a dumb cliche that offends you and is technically incorrect as well. Next time I print it, I may adjust the smoke a bit so as to eliminate that offending obvious error you pointed out - and HEY B.B. BABY ... thanks for that technical tip! Much appreciated! I guess in all my excitement and drooling I forgot to do a bit of blending there on the smoke. Next time, promise! It'll be better, okay? Probably would have noticed it myself, but I was busy playing with my blow up doll. Gee, I do hope the client doesn?t read this!

 

Q. #3. I'd like to know what you think of your ideas (except for the fact that they are supergreat and megacreative and hothothot) and how you back them up. Intellectually. If you know what I mean. Baby.

 

A. #3. Now see, you're hitting below the belt! OWE! You?re asking me think about what I think AND be intellectual. Tall order, indeed! And you?re asking me to set aside my huge ego - egads, all my bragging and bluster for naught. I knew I should never have said all those wonderul things about my own photo! What was I thinking? Wait a minute - that wasn?t even me! Hey, where did you get that supergreat / megacreative stuff anyway? WHO SAID THAT STUFF? I want to meet her!

 

Oh, wait another minute! You asked what I think of MY ideas. Which ideas would those be, luv? What have I done / said that could possibly have caused you to be interested in my ideas? I'm totally willing to share my ideas - ideas about what though? Cliches? Blow-up dolls? Rude comments? Photography techniques? Man / Woman relationships? F-stops? Shooting with large format cameras? Flowers? What? Do be more specific, and I'll be happy to oblige.

 

But let's break it down, shall we? In the technical details box for this photo, I pretty much explained everything that needs explaining. If someone has actual questions, they can ask and I'll be more than happy to answer. And if one simply DOES NOT LIKE this picture that's okay too... that is as long as they don't mind a little playful banter in reply to outright insult? I suppose it IS more fun to attack the one who created the so called offending cliche itself rather than discussing technical stuff / aesthetic stuff semi -intelligently. After all, how can a cliche have any photographic merit, right? Doesn't really leave much to be explained by me, does it? I would just hate for anyone reading all this to get bored with boring cliched attacks and silly nonsense without some fun stuff in response, that's all.

 

I would like to convey one personal opinion: If one does not have any images uploaded on Photo.net, and chooses to critique other's photos, their opinions and comments will be as empty as their portfolio. Other's may disagree - this is just my opinion! However, no one with an empty portfolio will ever get any respect from me!!! PERIOD! And I'm not just speaking of critiques of my work, but of anyone's work on photo.net. I know lots of people on photo.net have all sorts of reasons why they don't upload pictures. Nevertheless, no uploads = not walking the walk in my book.

 

And Birgit baby, please note, though I've looked at your portfolio, and despite all the cliches contained therein, I've not found it necessary to attack your pictures or yourself / your beingness. Got it? Cool. Love ya, James.

"...I've not found it necessary to attack your pictures or yourself / your beingness."

 

Of course you did. Your subtext is clear. And we both know it, honey ;-)

Help me out here, rude remarks judge, cliche photo expert, and now - subtext decipherer?

 

Wow - wonder woman! You have a lasso too?

 

Don't need one. I have my fangs.

GRRRRRRRRRRRR baby, GRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Birgit, James, I always like to stick my nose in where it probably doesn't belong, so here goes. I think you are both right. Smoke girl is a cliched, sexist image, no doubt about it. I can't help but feel that it was done to parody the various men's magazines of the 60's (Stag, True, etc) of which James is old enough to have read when he was a lad. It received many high ratings more because of the way it was done than the actual content I think. Who knows? Anyway, you both seem quite talented so keep up the good work and realize that you have spiced things up for the rest of us .

*lol* thank you, Tim. I like spicing up things! :-)

TOUCHE' to you both

 

Enjoyed the sparring / jousting, Birgit darling.

You're welcome, honey. Can repeat this one day. I'm sure I'll find some suitable picture in your folder to get in heat about ...

Let's have some more fun, eh what?

Now this is a 7/7, just great in every way, more power to ya!