wcroninger 0 Posted March 29, 2003 Nice work Mark...the lighting and pose is excellent. I rather think I would have rated higher w/o the moon. Not sure why but I think the image can stand on its own. Very nicely done regardless! Link to comment
joshua_kan1 0 Posted March 29, 2003 Excellent use of lighting and choice of black and white medium makes this a visually stunning photograph of the human form. Agree with William that this photograph would deliver more impact without the moon. Link to comment
americo_vespucci 0 Posted March 29, 2003 wonderful nude and lighting... I agree about cropping the moon. Link to comment
james_oneill 0 Posted March 29, 2003 Got to agree with the comments so far, the model is nicely posed and very well it, but if you think of how long a tele lens you need to get the moon that big, you need to be a VERY long way from the model - who is plainly not lit by moon light. The problem is if you take the moon out you either have a large empty area (not always bad), or you have a long thin photo. I don't know what those reflections are in the foreground, but if you don't like having an large empty space I'd try to extend those down so the model is highter up in the picture. Then you get quite a nice beside (or floating on) a lake effect. Link to comment
tom fleming 0 Posted March 29, 2003 I agree with the above comments about the moon. It looks fake mainly because it is too dull. The problem with the size of the moon and the direction of the reflected light also contribute to this unnatural look. But it's a great photo of the model! Link to comment
cm 0 Posted March 29, 2003 I would remove the monn. An excellent phto. excellent skintones, pose, , all. great body Link to comment
arda 0 Posted March 29, 2003 The lighting on your model is excellent and your model is beautiful. IMO the moon needs to be brighter. Regardless, nice job! Link to comment
forrest_black 0 Posted March 30, 2003 Like others, I don't think the moon fits. How about the silhouette of a man's figure instead, filled with stars and nebulae and such? Just a thought. Good lighting, good form! Link to comment
mg 0 Posted March 31, 2003 Mark, I agree with the previous comments... When you have such beautiful light on such a beautiful body, what would you need a moon for. If it were smaller, glowing, and lower would be better, but it is certainly not a good addition in my view anyway. Believe you did a job that was really great on the model and that it's all you needed for a great picture. Best regards. Link to comment
bunnypungky 0 Posted March 31, 2003 I must say, I like the one without moon much better. Nevertheless, this is really a good one. Thumbs up! Link to comment
lerxst 0 Posted April 1, 2003 but the moon needs to go. I think if you were to edit out the moon and move the model to just below the center-line and show all of the reflection across the bottom this would be an easy 7a/6o rated photo! Link to comment
lightwriter2 0 Posted April 1, 2003 I agree that the image is very strong and maybe better without the moon. Still very good with it though. Link to comment
knut_hoftun_knudsen 0 Posted April 12, 2003 I whish the moon was gone, cause the pictures of the woman have great qualities without this "manipilation". Link to comment
cd 0 Posted June 10, 2003 Personally I would like to see more of the reflection under her, especially on MOONLESS. Nice work. Link to comment
james_farber 0 Posted June 10, 2003 If moon there has to be, I somehow imagine it better on the left side, where the model would be looking at it given the slight tilt of her head. Link to comment
broeraad 0 Posted June 10, 2003 like the lighting and reflection, all together a winner in my eyes Link to comment
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now