roie_galitz 0 Posted September 1, 2003 Was shot in an ancient house in central Isarel. Comments and Critiques are welcome. Thanks, Roie G Link to comment
davidmccracken 2 Posted September 1, 2003 I am not talking about the contrast of the image but the contrast of the youth of the girl and the age of the building. I also like the contrast of the curves of the girl and the straight lines of the stone. I am not sure if I like the girl's hair or not. It does look like it needs brushed! Pictures of pretty girls always get a lot of ratings... pictures of pretty naked ones get more. It is a pleasing image! Photographically it is not outstanding but it is good! Please feel free to rate / comment on / critique any of my photos. Link to comment
wcroninger 0 Posted September 1, 2003 Roie, I will certainly agree with David relative his comments on the number of responses pictures of pretty girls vs pretty naked girls generate! I do, however, feel this one comes up on the outstanding level. It is very nicely composed and presented. The technical aspects: focus, exposure etc. are spot on. That does not make it outstanding, agreed. What I do appreciate is the handling of the subject. I think the viewer initially reacts to how well all the above elements work together. At some point you get around to her beauty but you have not let it overpower the image. Looking at much of the figure work on photo.net this is an exception and worthy of praise. Nicely done. Link to comment
berniek 0 Posted September 1, 2003 The wall on the right is much to "hot" and tends to pull one's eye away from the model. Her pose offers a bit of forced modesty that doesn't help the image either. The necklace doesn't help -- it's indistinct enought to cause you to wonder what the few bright spots are. There is a stronger image in here but it's the upper left quadrant -- a considerable amount of cropping. Link to comment
Guest Guest Posted September 1, 2003 But why the hand over her vagina? That's weird, given she's naked already. Link to comment
bradkim 8 Posted September 2, 2003 One question, Roie.... Is this a straight shot under natural light? or did you add some diffused flash-light? Link to comment
detlef 6 Posted September 2, 2003 sensual....a bit naughty and playful...great placement of the doorway with the figure Link to comment
sam_nielsen 0 Posted September 2, 2003 Artificial DOF? Truly lovely. Nice photo, pretty model. It seems however, as if the depth of field effect is a post exposure addition. Is it? I would try to make it look more natural. Link to comment
roie_galitz 0 Posted September 2, 2003 Thanks you all for your kind comments. and now, for a little technique note: This shot was made in an ancient house and the model was standing out of the window. it was shot under natural light without fill flash. The post processing included sepia tonning, artifficial DOF (maybe I should make it more delicate), slight gaussian blur layer on the model on a different layer leaving the important items sharp (face, hair, nipples, hand, necklace). since the human eye is attracted to 3 things: bright, colored and sharpenned, so I manipulated the viewer's eyes to the face, the breast and her hand. by a small poll I did, it worked perfectly. I don't know if it's common here for a photographer to reveal his secrets, but in my opinion, we are all here to learn from each other. Thanks again for your kind words, they mean a lot to me, Roie Galitz. Link to comment
robert gordon 0 Posted September 2, 2003 As long as we are informed that the image was shot in an ancient house in Israel, I'd like to see more of the house. The architectual features we do see could be almost anywhere. The woman has a beautiful body and is well posed, but a bit stiff. Was this her first nude setting? Link to comment
walter_strong3 0 Posted September 2, 2003 I'm really impressed by this girl's modesty! Link to comment
Guest Guest Posted September 3, 2003 Great shot =) Good work! Sepia works well here. I also feel that the DOF manipulation is not required here. Link to comment
leandro_alvarez 0 Posted September 3, 2003 Great work. She is like an angel. There something strange in her hair, but it's very good photo. Link to comment
michael_wagner2 0 Posted September 3, 2003 This is a very nice photograph. I find the comments are instructive as well. For my money, I think the right side of the photograph really doesn't add anything, as the action is on the left. Perhaps crop out some of the wall? Also, I would leave out the necklace. The model's pose and expression are excellent. Link to comment
philip_dhingra 0 Posted September 3, 2003 Staring into the girl's eyes, I feel cold and naked myself. For all it's stillness, this is definitely an action shot. Her still messy hair and desire to cover herself indicates that she has just peeked out quickly from the shadows of the building. She's also hugging the archframe, risking the scratches on her back in order to save some discreteness-Who knows who may be passing by in the sunlight to the right. While her look is innocent, the situation and other features indicate a skilled temptress, possibly a harlot. Why the necklace? Why the shaved pussy? Why the tan lines? This can't be your wife. No doubt it could be your summer love, but it's unlikely you're her only "love" as well. Link to comment
scott_cummings1 0 Posted September 4, 2003 This is the first picture I've commented on in awhile. The contrast is stunning, the pose great, and the composition perfect. My eyes run right through and around the picture without ever leaving. As for pics of pretty girls getting ratings, pics of beautiful things always get ratings. Who likes a picture of an ugly root or a boring landscape? Great work! 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