Yawn...

Any thoughts, cantankerous or glowing, welcome....

Eye catching. And a powerful woman. Captures a strong personality. Nice

I'm afraid yawn is right for me. It's what I think of as "Japot" (just another pair ...) photography. The one with the boots which sits next to it in the folder is - as far as I'm concerned - a much better picture.

 

Thank you, I like them both. They aren't just another pair, they are the models. Her name is Eva. She's an overtly sexual woman - that's a large chunk of her personality - one side, if you will of a complex woman. This shot is about the fluidity she feels inside her own skin.

 

In reading your presentation about your own nude work, you seem to be a bit conflicted about nudity - feeling there needs to be some larger justification or connection to an interior life. I would tend to agree, but sometimes that connection is the sexuality projected. This is a shot of a unique person, not just a nice rack. And it's point is to reveal her rather poetic sensuality. Perhaps the picture fails, but I don't think it does because her breasts are prominent or because the subject is the flirt of her sexuality. Seems like a subject worthy of photographic exploration.

I don't think it fails "because her breasts are prominent or because the subject is the flirt of her sexuality"... but because the light is boring. I think you would be better served by light that is as challenging as your subject matter. What tools are you lighting with? If it starts with the word "soft" I'd say it's unsuited to this task... t

p.s. "flirt" seems a little tame for this attitude.

It took me a while to warm up to this pose, but I'm there now and I love it. I'll have to agree with Tom, though, the light doesn't really suit the...well the everything. Also, I kind of wish you had included just a bit more of the naughty schoolgirl skirt, as I think it would help say more about the girl(or at least how you explained her). either way, its not "japot" or whatever any other meatheads want to call it. cheers.

I definitely do not think it's anything one could classify as "japot" although I have seen enough of those. And in today's world it is very much in the line of flirting as our young people see it. I've seen a bit of this sort of thing in recent years. The woman and her expression and her presentation of self prevent the ordinary. Her expression, coupled with her self-exposure, alone says a lot to me.

 

I think the lighting works too, precisely because, as the photog said, she's an "overtly sexual woman". The lighting is overt as hell. It's bright, well covered and as in-your-face as she is. It, therefore, fits her, the situation and the pose and it adds to the photo, helping to say something. Altogether it says she is sexually playful, she likes who she is (which is wonderful in itself) and she is enjoying life and isn't afraid to be herself.

 

Yes, one could use different lighting, but I'd really have to see the result to see if it strikes me as well as this does to say what the artist intended.

 

Thanks for sharing!

The tasty staff

I like the pose, wonderful model.

Good work!

The tasty staff? The tasty staff? (the perfect typo)... t

See Tom, I knew you had a jovial side. Sorry if the lighting bored you. If you stare at her left breast, you can get a taste of that hard light you've a hankerin' for. (Hairlight misfire) It was a faux paux, but I'm happy to oblige through the happy accident.

 

Hard light and dramatic shadows really bore me. I like the glow of that dispicable s*ft light and I'm truly tired of seeing landscape nudes, all hilly and curvy and reductionist. Every fresnel only, or even solitary soft box sho, pisses me off, and I do try them every time I shoot. What can I say, I'm enamoured with soft shadows when it comes to light. I adore overcast days.

 

Except, of course, that weegee flash starkness. And I'm still plotting a way to create a hot ringlight. I also hate color - too many variables and it brings out the boring aspect of studio lighting.

 

But meanwhile, I'm having a gas bathing beauties in soft glow and waiting for a moment that seems compositionaly interesting. It requires alot of staring down and akward pauses, but training the trigger finger to reacte to a momentary golden moment is such a chore for me. Ain't learnin' grand?

"f you stare at her left breast, you can get a taste of that hard light you've a hankerin' for." *whew* I'm all hankered out. Yeah maybe a hair or back or background light would be enough to shut me up. I'm revisiting old lectures (just discovered how... duh), and came on this (damn, another pun) way down the list. How's that ring light rig coming?... t

I've yet to play mad scientist. And why the hell would I want to shut you up, your cantankerous rantings are entertaining. I'm a fan of soft light (or at least, I'm justifying spending stupid money on a portable and respectable lighting rig instead of my $200 home depot fun)

 

I love every adventure into hard light charaiscuro I stumble on. I just can't shoot them. My dapplings in it bug me. I'm also bothered by the penchant to doll up a gorgeous woman in shiny stuff and shoot them against an industrial wasteland. Frankly, it pisses me off.

 

I like the juxtaposition of soft light with my subjects. Fetish for me is womblike - not the stern B acing of the scary dungeon. I don't find the light boring, but represenative of the interior dynamic versus the projected image.

 

The curious thing about the sexually adventurous or the sex worker is that often what thrills them in the quiet moment is the snuggle and the tender caress. Like most of us, Work is work and the last thing we bring to homelife. To me, the most interesting part of shooting overt sexuality is capturing that dichotomy. The innocence and yearning behind the assertive.

 

Is it any wonder I like soft light?

 

I do appreciate your criiques and their implicit challenge. But I have the hobbiest's leisure of thinking about what I do. And while we may fundamentally disagree, your reacions always make me formalize what it is I think. So I guess I appreciate the lectures although I'm suspicious of why you feel the need to lecture. Jaded is fun, but you ain't dead yet.

 

And feel free to pun. It's part of my point and I consider it a success:)

This apparent contradiction of inner condition and outer expression is one of the most motivating factors in who I ask to photograph. I like this thing I heard that I cannot credit, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of a petty mind", meaning I think, that predictable consistency is not only boring, but indicative of a mini-intellect.

I find these contradictions most engaging when they are unconciously applied. This is one of the most endearing qualities of the few generations that have followed mine. A cavalier disregard for matching the inner condition with outer signifiers. Really mean looking people are really sweet, really smooth looking people are hopeless geeks, and deliberately understated wardrobes cover incredibly dynamic personalities. When you said, "interior dynamic versus the projected image" I immediately thought "yeah, absolutely"... t

p.s. The "lecturing" tone of my missives are entirely due to their being written. I do not talk this way. I'd beat my own self senseless if I did...

As I've said, I like you're lecturing tone. You're much less of an asshole than you sound. "Absolutely" is the march of the drummer that makes us passionate. I don't waste time on minds I don't find engaging.