Overexposed: Curled Nude

After looking at this photo of the week I viewed the other images you have posted. You are both a talented photographer and a great model. I especially like two nude self-portraits: "Head back nude" and "nude with mirrors". These images are exceptionally beautiful and sensuous. It is difficult to look at "head back nude" and not be taken with the desire to bestow a kiss on those lips. I get pretty bored looking at nudes that make the model look no more human than a piece of driftwood.

 

I think you are a better photographer than many contemporary shooters being celebrated for their nudes (Greg Gorman, Howard Schatz, Bruce Webber, etc.). They use $50,000 in lighting equipment and don't achieve the result you get with a single bulb. Thanks for sharing your work with us.

Thanks to everyone for your comments...although its only Monday, I am not taking off the kevlar suit just yet...
I've been asked about posing - well, it helps that I have modeled a lot for other photographers, mostly catalog stuff and some glamour. I still do some, even though I'm now the wrong side of thirty for that industry. But it taught me about poses and angles and such - so, practice helps. I do it alone, because I think an assistant would inhibit me. I wouldn't try weird things that sometimes work in front of another person. I like working alone.

My suggestions for self portraits...well, its sometimes helpful to mark out the area of lens coverage with little bits of tape or something, so you don't cut off your own head.

Try placing a mirror as close the camera as possible so you can see how the pose looks to the camera. I have also done shots where I put a mirror right behind the camera, and I could see the LED screen of the camera in it. Too small for fine tuning, but helpful for general composition.

Practice the pose before you shoot. When you get one you like, then get up and set the timer. To remember exactly what you did, say it out loud to yourself - "Left leg down and folded, right leg up leaning to the left, right elbow on knee, left hand on left knee..." When you only have a few seconds this helps!

And hey, go for some drama, do something different. You don't to show them to anyone else if they don't work. Thats the beauty of working alone - do whatever comes into your head. No one will see them, unless you want them to. Take risks. Be silly. Experiment. Like any shoot, many of the won't be what you want. But I have found it to be a very interesting exercise, stimulating my creativity for my other shoots with other models.
Again, thanks for comments and input...

Very nice. Congratulations on the POW.

It's a nice photo. I have to just come out and say it- I can't completely respect digital photography. Ansel Adams had the opinion that bracketing meant you didn't know how to shoot something properly. I feel that philosophy can be taken towards digital work: Shoot, Look at the screen, oh it didn't turn out? Erase it and Shoot again. Maybe photo.net should Have Digital Of the Week along with Photo Of the Week.

Clean, somewhat sensual, yet very neutral and not intrusive. Most nudes taken by men tend to be either too stark and rigid (our capacity for spatial reference over-riding our aethestic sense) or just plain subliminal and too sexual. Most of Amy's work is pretty gender neutral and not intended to arouse, yet would annoy the hell out of a physiology illustrator, which is a good thing.

 

I'd like to see the lighted circle on the floor be larger and perhaps envelop the form more, or be less distinct to avoid what is a borderline "X-files" look. Pose is good, along with camera angle and light source, but the obvious clipping by the digital camera is annoying. Those of you who think it's jusitifed because it look like a conventional print that's been solarized need to forget about those photo 101 tricks.

 

It's becoming obvious that Amy is exceeding the capacity of her digital camera and might want to team up with a local photographer who is experienced with B/W. Many of her images, including this one, would be stunning in DR5 B/W, but the modesty allowed with a digital camera is a fairly large factor when shooting self nudes.

 

 

Just an other congrat' to Amy and 2 comments for Matthew: 1) Amy doesn't seems like a "Shoot, Look at the screen, oh it didn't turn out? Erase it and Shoot again" kind of photographer to me, her work shows knowledge and skills. 2) A good picture is a good picture, independently of the medium you used to record it (I think even Adams must have done some pretty serious selection and lab work on his negatives, he even wrote a few books on it if I remember well... now that I think about it, he even used the digital camera of the moment (Polaroid) quite extensively and not only to produce test-shots).

It's the year 2001 and some still grumble into grey beards about analog vs digital. LHU.

I've yet to see an analog image on photo.net - THAT would be interesting.

Nice dreamy pic Amy. Regards.

Damn, it's about time that one of the few women with work on photo.net gets some recognition.

 

Special cheers to you Amy for being in love with the female form and unafraid to display it.

All I have to say it this print is proof that talent does not require expensive toys to produce something beautiful. Well done Amy, from your background explanation you mention about putting the cloth on the island, if the top is wood I might have chosen to just leave it showing. As to the overexposre I think this IS the correct exposure, maybe you could have burned your arm and face just a tiny bit, but overall I think the POW is well deserved. Cheers......

What I am challenging is the skill involved with digital photography. The Shoot, erase, try again scenario was an illustration of the way one can abuse the ease of the digital world. Not to mention digital omits any kind of developing process- which is half of the art of photography. I won't back down from my opinion, because I don't have to. But I never directly challenged anyone's talent- only the validity of a particular format.

Wonder if the comments would be so generous if it were not a nude woman.

God is in the details and the addition of a person behind the lens would be helpful in the details and composition. Sorry but the scattershop chance image is fine, but if she was exposing film it would be much less successful.

I am sorry as heck to see you guys thinking with something else here. The shot's blown out and the lighting on the foot and shoulder aren't working.

I agree that the digital shots should be on a seperate list. Luddite be damned!

Worst of all? Why do the only women subjects you post here have to be nude?

The cult of personality marches on.

Clyde

 

I personally enjoy this picture. I do agree with a previous poster that the overexposure from the upward light has an alien abuction feel that is inconsistent with the facial expression.

To Matthew Wittingham: I used to believe that digital was polluting the viewing public by allowing people to do things at the click of a button, without spending time and effort mastering the wet darkroom skills that were previously required. Some painters in the 1880's contended early photographs were not art because photographers chetaed and used cameras instead of brushes. Traditional black and white images are different then digital images in that the skills required to create them are different. Judging an image based on its medium is like judging a person by the color of their skin. Just because I manually developed and printed an image does not mean that it is inherently better then a digital image. It only means I spent some time in the darkroom as opposed to spending some time in photoshop. Being a master of any given format comes from creativity using that format to convey your personal artistic message. If using a digital camera and photoshop is not "art", where does it stop? Do people who use labs to devlop get tossed out of the artist circle next? When Ansel Adams helped create polaroid land film? Are the pictures he took with his polaroid not art because of the camera he used? The presented image is the art, NOT the format.

I like many things about this picture. The angle from which it was taken, the minimal background, lots of shadow and that even though it's a nude, most of the picture is left to your imagination. Even though it looks overexposed at the top, I think it would not look as good if it was darker.

Amy--

 

Kudos to you. Your images are truly beautiful. You have a unique approach to studio photography which creates a gut reaction in your viewers.

 

As a travel photographer, I don't share your vision of the world. But I appreciate it a great deal. And if, someday, I stumble upon a place and am reminded of the forms in your photos, I just might get a shot that evokes the lines and shapes which you so elegantly capture.

 

Congratulations on POTW.

Amy

Congrats! It is a great work and ofcourse it is just tip of an icebreg of your entire contributions. Excellent and I love this photo as well. It has a definite message in the photo. Though it is overexposed, it adds a specific clarity to the image as well the message it is trying to convey. Great and congrats!!

I'm pro photographer from Slovenia. Very nice to see some girl who have courage to take beautifull naked pictures of herself. I prefered BW shots. Keep going!!!!

 

Nice, simple yet captivating pose. What I mostly like is the expression, like totally absent from this dimension. I find your pics amazing, even more considering that you work alone. Keep going, Amy.

Congratulations on the POW!

Beautiful, pensive, introspective image. While the overexposure is evident on the forearm, the exposure enhances other, more subtle features such as your hair against the background.

 

Fantastic shot, and well worthy of POW!

Based on Amy's comment, it seems that one of the great advantages of digital photography is the privacy you get. ( There's no need to worry about sending it to a photolab) As she said, you are the only one that sees it, and I support anything that encourages artistic thought. Great work Amy!

Amy, if your aim is to become one of the top self-portrait nude-photographers, you are on the way to success. OVEREXPOSED CURLED NUDE suffers, like all people-photos which are shot from above, the compressed body 'syndrome', namely, that the head is out of proportion to the body size. Trying to be inventive has the potential to back-fire,- by other parameters being compromised! Most nude-photographers take pictures of bodies due to their beauty, as seen in the eyes of the beholder. OVEREXPOSED CURLED NUDE does show very little of your well proportioned and elegant body. I'm almost inclined to suggest to you, to make up your mind: WHETHER to be a nude-model OR a nude-photographer. In both instances you do promise to achieve greatness.

In a word "SEXY!"

Hi amy.

I've been using a coolpix for twelve months to shoot people, mostly flashlit. One of the problems inherent with digital is the rather shallow latitude, if you don't accurately record a highlight, then you'll record nothing at all...and there's no way you'll print down, or burn digitally, something that isn't even remotely recorded.

I think your well balanced self portrait suffers from the highlight blow out.

It's a good abstract, I imagine your on the widest end of the cameras zoom (?).

Perhaps the most interesting part of the image would be a rectangle drawn just above your right armpit, taking the wide shape of your arm, with your face emerging...this could make a more interesting portrait, for me anyway.

 

Have you seen Andre Kertesz's nudes?

 

Keep plugging away, I do think the Polapan work on your site is a lot more intriguing than your self nudes, however you may leave some people here dissapointed if you no longer model.

 

 

Best Regards

CB.

 

 

 

 

Today is only Tuesday (my previous messages are from Monday) and I wonder how did you managed to erase your own rating (the double 8)?

 

This second part of the comment is added Wednesday: I just found out how any member can manage his own ratings (or, the way you deleted your rating to your own picture). It was so simple: from "My Workspace".

Evocative, radiant, sensual, appears to be lit from within. Singularly encaptures the viewer and draws them in. This captures elements beyond film and apertures. Overexposure is a technicians perspective. I am at a loss for words. (This is a rare phenomena.)

I think a lot of people are giving positive feedback because it's a nude photo of a female. Maybe next week, they'll post a photo of a nude male with the same technical flaws. Then everyone would flame the photo for being technically bad. Sure, I'll give Amy credit for being so brave and confident to post a self-nude photo. But judging by the lighting technique, it was not well executed. The highlights on her hair is obviously blown out. Theres a small shadow in front of her ear. Then, look at her feet on the right. It looks as if it wasnt even attached to the body. Then her other feet is much brighter than her right foot. Her left arm not getting much exposure is blending in with her back, which makes it look as if there is a an object poking out of her back. The right arm is overexposed as well, only to be shadowed by her head. Her breast is shadowed with a leak of light hitting the breast, which doesnt represent anything. Maybe an advertisement for Earrings? I think not. Doesn't do it for me.