Laurel

Last shot of the day

Very nice. Where's the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, ...

Great shot, sexy lady. How anyone could rate this as a 2 is beyond me. It blows me away that James hit you below the belt like that. His work is good but very different. His work is very manipulated in PS too. This is pure. I like what you have done here. I'll dream about this woman. He refers to all his nudes as tasteful. This is also very tatseful my friend

Look real... but...

OK so what are ratings for ? They're to tell the photographer what a range of people think of a picture. This one has picked up everything from a 7/7 to a 2/2 and all points in between. That should give the photographer a pretty good idea that opinion is divided on this one.

Now I don't like it; I try to keep about 3/4 of my scores in the 3-4-5 bracket. That leaves 1/8th for 1&2 and 1/8th for 6/7. Do I think that 7 out of 8 pictures of body that I look at are better than that one? Yes. Is it in the bottom 1 or 2% ? No. So I make that a 2 rather than a 1.

So what don't I like ? This is a front-on breasts shot. At least we haven't got the model grinning inanely into the lens asking "Here are my breasts, how do you like them?" but instead we have her head in shot but her features hidden, similarly the rest of her body is hidden so the concentration is on the breasts. But there are so many ways to photograph this part of the body, and to my eye (let me empasise this is my eye, my opinion, and there are obviously lots of others) to my eye this is least interesting. Nor do I find a picture sexy just because it has breasts in it.

It looks like this was done by natural light, and I feel like that should be applauded, but it doesn't quite come off. There's too much shadow where it shouldn't be. Then there's the crop. Personally I'd crop it top, left and bottom (to take the hands and little bit of leg out which is just a distraction).

Now David says my work is very different. It is, and to be honest I don't think many people would like both this and mine. (David calls mine good and likes this so there are obviously some). It is really important that if you "play the ratings game" that you keep your feet on the ground when you pickup 6s and 7s and you don't get downcast over the odd 2 or 1.

If you photograph the body you have enough trouble trying to sort out the people who go "Wey hey Tits!" and add 2 or 3 to the score the picture merits, and the ones who go "Breasts; how disgusting" and subtract 2 or 3 from the score it deserves. Like I've said my opinion is one among many. David has every right to his, and it would be really good if someone who likes this picture would say what they like. How else do we learn ?

..for the feedback. I certainly didn't expect this.

Whether you like it or not, to me this is unique. I do not find this as a sexual inuendo breast shot in the least. I see this as a unique look at a woman who happens to have her breasts exposed. Back in the day they would have called this a study. Nothing fake about this at all.

Sometimes I get pissed when people give me 2/2 or something along those lines. But at least you have a very detailed reason why.

who cares! beautiful portrait, will done.. chris

thanks for the lecture, James, next time I must ask you to jump on that soap box and chuck it on out at the wide world, there is a reason why free advice is priced the way it is.

 

oh, by the way the gentleman who posted this photo was looking for a critique of the photo, not a lecture on the ratings system, dont you think.

 

have a nice film/digital day

 

 

Someone looked at the rating I gave and called it hitting below the belt, and mailed me to say so. I made it quite clear mine was one opinion among many, how I rate and why I didn't like it.

 

Your contribution to discussion of this picture has been what by the way ? You gave the picture a brace of 6s but spent your time sniping at me instead of saying what it was you liked ...

I feel hardy ... with Laurel...!