glamour photography 1 Mag 7

There is nothing offensive about the human body when it is presented

with grace and with respect. I wish that those persons that critic

such pictures, which very often turn out to be those that are

themselves attracted to photographing flowers and landscapes,

understand that there is a lot of similitude in our subjects. Our

purpose in both cases is to capture the beauty and harmony that we

perceive around us in nature. I find this to be an honourable

mission, whatever the subject matter that one chooses.

John, nude is one of the great classic themes of fine arts and photography and does not require any justification. Sad times indeed if one has to justify a nude. Your nudes are among the chastest around here, but I don't mind more malicious ones as well - nude and erotism are obviously related and it would be funny to accept one without another.

Thank you Michele. I love erotism too, as long as it never crosses the threshold into vulgarity. I am not trying to be "defensive" so much as to attempt to "convert" those that see evil where it does not exist. When I photograph a beautiful girl, I compare her to a landscape and I speak to her in those terms. I have not as yet met a girl that does not relate to the comparison.

I think that a very tasteful image. The only thing that I don't like is the tatoo. That's a general bias that I have for all tatoo for men or women. You end uo with a beautiful form that's been desecrated.

Thanks Jim, I know that you don't mean it badly, but that is a personal remark that has more to do with the model than my photo which I don't think has it's place here. Also, frankly, it gets a little embarrassing when the models ask me to see what is said about their photos. I really think that we should avoid making statements about the girls, however well intentioned they may be. Thank you for your understanding.

John, I agree with Jim about the Tatoo. If you place a photo here to be critiqued, don't you expect that we should be able to comment on the subject, within the limits of good taste? Although this girl is beautiful, the tatoo makes your photo less appealing to me, and Aesthetics is what we critique, especially for a nude. I know this is true for only some portion of viewers, but I find tatoos offensive to an otherwise beautiful body. As for the girl, she needs to be able to take such critisism, she altered her body from natural and should expect some. Wait til she gets old and see what it looks like! Just my opinion.

Another great photo John, for whom the tattoo matters?

This is a very nice picture and it actually portrays a woman in a very normal scenario. I don't actually find the tattoo distracting, but rather appealing, I'm not into tattoos, but this one is not some horrible animal or huge flower or skull, etc. Anyways, what I don't like about this picture is the expression on her face ... it just doesn't look real ... is that the expression of a woman coming out of the shower?

This is a very nice whole-body portrait of a beautiful young woman.

John. I don't think you have to be so sensitive about the tatoo comments, they are not insulting to your model but merely express a point of view. I quite agree that negative comments along the lines "she is too fat / old / ugly" are potentially hurtful and should be avoided but a tatoo is not there by accident and if someone chooses to have one and display it they must expect that people may make a comment on it, either positive or negative as part of a critique of the photo. This one is very subtle , compared with many others such as those in my photo "Tatoos", and I'm surprised that anyone would feel it spoils the picture. But the purpose of a critique forum is to find out what other people think, so we should not complain when they tell us (within reason). ... Jonathan

shes is beautiful no doubt, but you havent captured the eroticism here. the expression is somewhat numbing. i dont feel excited(no pun intended) your other photos are indeed very beautiful

Thank you.That is an interesting comment. My feeling however is that a full frontal should be subtle and not put the accent on erotism. If an image is erotic, I will present it otherwise, as you will see in some photos to follow. The "look" I tried to capture here is one of pride and self confidence. You may find that interesting.

When people are offended by tattoos, it has nothing to do with the photograph. Thank goodness she wasn't holding a cigarette as well or that entire "smoking is disgusting" crowd would have come out.

 

Is the photograph well lit? Well composed? Well exposed? Yes to all counts. You're supposed to be critiquing the work of the photographer, not the subjects taste in body art. Grow up.

I specialize in flowers, landscapes, animals, etc., and I like this photo. It reminds me of a recent rattlesnake photo I recently took because the subject is beautiful, dangerous, noble, and worthy of capturing well on film. A tattoo is simply another form of makeup: done well, it enhances natural beauty. I only wish the tattoo here were a little sharper.

.... i think on an objective, photo on the screen level, the tattoo distracts from the natural beauty of your subject. i don't think its an insult to the model to say so. she has the right to have one and its your choice to capture it. but for me your photos convey the matter-of-fact "natural" beauty of women. this one, i think, showcases someone else's artwork which, i'm guessing, will appear quaint in a few years time. but its honest, which may be the point. ->ps-> there are few more beautiful "natural landscapes" than the contours of a woman and ansel adams, i'm sure, took few pictures of landfills. as for mixing it up with critics, that's the artist's due.

 

 

Very well done, John!

 

beautiful model, excellent framing and use of the interesting metal bench. the bathrobe is great idea, and the lighting is very flaterring. the only thing I'd try differently is to experiment w/ the background. maybe use some blue gels and go for a fresh, wet look.

The pic is very good, technically very well executed and you are absolutely right on you comment on the top. Regards.

Very much in agreement with John's previous comment.

Here we have a tasteful portrait, candid and innocent, excellently executed.

Well done, John!

Thank you Alberto. If arrogance to some means that I discourage people from making personal comments about the models which they may find offensive, regretfully, I will continue to do so whenever possible, like others do too. My models are friends, and I ask their permission to post their photos and they often ask to see what is written. They do not like to hear that they are anorectic, in need of a chiropratician or that their choice to add a tattoo to their body was in bad taste or will leave them looking terrible when they become old. This has nothing to do with my person or my response to critics of my photos which I have never contested, other than to express my point of view regarding the results obtained.

John: A technically nice shot. The highlight on the model's breast was a tiny bit disconcerting to me, as it conveyed "wetness" on otherwise dry skin. It set up an anomaly in my mind. But, perhaps that is something you wanted.

 

I am wondering how the photo might have looked with wet "out of the bath" skin.

 

I thought that the model looked a bit tense with the shoulders hunched up, but again maybe that is part of the overall look you wanted.

 

The iron rail is wonderful, and fills a nice role.

 

The model herself is beautiful with wonderful form and health.

 

I love the image. Tasteful yet evocative.

 

Laurence, the wet look sounds terrific, but it's winter and she was outside in the passageway! As for the lighting, it's not a choice unfortunately. I use a flash so I am very much a victim of what turns out. Thanks for the critic.

OK, I also am not crazy for the tattoo. But let's look at the photo on it's own merit. Tattoo or not the photo is made very well and I don't think anyone can deny that. End of converstation

I thought this was about the gecko. Great shot. Ignore the, ah, well, just ignore them.

Wallace, I think you're pretty well off base here. I also notice your aesthetics & originality ratings average to be quite low while you yourself have 0 uploads. What's up with that?

Funny, for all the worthless talk about tatoos (for my 2 cents, I love girls with tatoos) I have to say that the thing that draws my eye here is the uncanny camera-eye connection between model and camera.

This portrait has a lot of warmth. Part of that comes from the fantastic tones and gentle shapes of the model's body, but a lot also comes from the model's wide-eyed, ironically icy stare...

 

I wish the puritans would get off their "damages the natural beauty" high-horse (please, you're degrading this woman as a person by insinuating she is here for your observation and her self-expression matters not) and actually look at the photography.

sorry... I don't know why that posted twice and for some reason it won't let me delete them...