the grey house 0 Posted March 23, 2004 Please view large. OK - I'm really going out on a limb here. This is not meant to be a cheesy baby photo. It is meant to be kitch and inspired by the work of the Glitter Guru. Let me know if this works or if it is just a baby photo to you? Your comments are appreciated. No doubt I'll be sticking to landscapes after the comments I'm anticipating. Regards Paul... Link to comment
atkphotoworks 0 Posted March 23, 2004 My friend if kitsch was the intent, I think you accomplished it. Yet nevertheless, still very cute and creative. Link to comment
the grey house 0 Posted March 23, 2004 Loft, Jennifer, Jack and Amar - thank you so much for your comments. This is really off the wall for me. Kitsch was the intent, although I'm also pleased you find my little boy cute of course ;-) Thanks again. Paul... Link to comment
mareval 2 Posted March 24, 2004 Thank you for this image, I really love it. His expression, color, definition, is very original. What do you think about the same in vertical position? (a kiss for him is a supermodel) Link to comment
the grey house 0 Posted March 24, 2004 Sarah, Allon & Marta - Thank you so much for your comments. I'm pleased you enjoyed this image. Link to comment
roberto p 0 Posted March 24, 2004 I agree...this is pure originality and it's so neat! Great! Link to comment
amanda mumma 0 Posted March 24, 2004 but its gotta be in portrait because I am turning my head 90 degrees to see his adorable face!!! No it isn't 'just another baby shot'...firstly it is such a lovely face shot and the glitter is different from the norm. You could make some money doing this!!!! Glitter baby portraits..the whirlpool effect is almost symbolic, they certainly draw you in to their own little sparkly (and often not so sparkly) whirlpools don't they? A little bit of glitter makes all the hard slog worthwhile. God he's cute! Cheers. Link to comment
Guest Guest Posted March 25, 2004 I'm going to have go with the yikes he's cute comment too. Cool effect. well done. I actually had baby dreams last night (probably from watching TLC-birthing stuff) I like it turned. May you remember the sparkle when he pokes holes in your walls trying to see whats inside them. Or tries to unscrew every screw in your home. Link to comment
the grey house 0 Posted March 25, 2004 Thanks Knicki, Amanda and Roberto - your comments mean a great deal to me. I've attached aportrait version. I don't know, to me this doesn't look quite right? Let me know. Thanks again, Paul... Link to comment
cristina_fumi 0 Posted March 25, 2004 I like the orizontal version more: I guess because it reminds me my Valeria taking her bath at the same age! But maybe I would like to see a little of his/her body even under the softness... Link to comment
the grey house 0 Posted March 25, 2004 Cristina, thanks - The original is Jack in his bath, hence the landscape formatting. The original (attached for reference) does have some of his arms and body showing. However I wanted to try and get a rather surreal look to the image. It did make me feel odd though messing around in photoshop with my baby boy ;-) Thanks for your interest and comments. Regards Paul... Link to comment
pnital 36 Posted March 25, 2004 Kitch or not Paul, it is original at least, from other babies photos here. The baby itself is adorable! take some more, as he is such a beauty of a model........Pnina Link to comment
eye2eyephoto 0 Posted March 25, 2004 ya know, Paul... the first thing I noticed is that the portrait version draws me into his eyes better... and I like it better... ::shrug:: either way... VERY cool!! jb Link to comment
cristina_fumi 0 Posted March 25, 2004 I've seen the original: Jack is gorgeous! And I think your treatment does good to the shot! Link to comment
peter_kervarec 0 Posted March 26, 2004 Hi, I like this very much.Couldnt find the poprtrait format so I copied and rotated. Peter Link to comment
the grey house 0 Posted March 26, 2004 Hi All, Thanks for all the comments and rating on this one. You know over the last few days looking at the portrait version I think it does work better. You're right it does draw you more to his eyes. Not to worry - great comments and suggestions as always. Regards to all, Paul... Link to comment
kristin_morales 0 Posted March 27, 2004 cute factor grabbed me here....but I like portrait version better. The glitter, tub, and babe make good clean fun. Link to comment
maritatoftgard 0 Posted March 27, 2004 what a gorgeous child..great idea...and superduper kitsch thats for sure! mita;-) Link to comment
briarrose 0 Posted April 14, 2004 Paul--you've got another winner here! The kitsch works--absolutely. Heck--who says we have to do "high art" all the time, anyway?! :-) As for the portrait/landscape debate...I go for portrait. It has a different feel--his little eyes are slightly crossed, and his nose is off center, and he looks less "zen-baby" and more like "baby-who-has-something-on-his-mind". It's funnier--and it goes with the kitsch effect. Landscape--it's more dreamy...and I can see liking that effect, too--but it's just a little distracting to have your brain trying to reorient the photo everytime you look at it. Either way, though--two thumbs up! :-) 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