Lucia

Comments highly welcome.

.

very interesting imago! well done!

Very well done, good work...

A strong image indeed ! What I like here is frame inside the frame and how the weeds seem to suround the girl.. centered composition gives a kind of religious aura to the pic.

 

I am distubed by the colour of the hair that is nearly the same as the wall and the lighting is a bit too flat imo.

 

Overall a nice photo. I don't know for what purpose it was made for but for me it makes the clothes and girl look nice but doesnt tell me a story.

 

Cheers ;)

Impressive setup, but the light is really too flat for my taste as nothing really stands out. I think a fashion photographer must know what he is doing when choosing light, so I guess he was trying to achieve something but just didn't get it right. The model is completely inexpressive and drowned in her clothes and hair as well

 

Simone

I generally agree with previous commenters, compositionally I find it too static. Anyway, I don't know much about fashion shots, so I can't be helpfull proposing other ideas.

 

Although that, what I DO find interesting is the overall warm colors and tones. Aside of her own natural beauty, off course. :-)

What an incredible backdrop! The model's face is a bit washed out, but the muted colors work very well overall with the vines and the wall.

Your portfolio has lots of great images. This image is however a bit off IMO. Lack of contrast and the overall busy feeling with weeds all over is ok for the sake of something different. Clothing seems extraordinary but the photograph is not.

Flat, lifeless, and dreary. A statement about the model, fashion, or the photo? Take your pick, but hope it's just her hair.

The wall and the outfit are intersting but the model doesn't belong there. Her skin tones clashed with the background. For a second I thought I was looking at a headless model.

I'm not sure what subject can be framed to best effect against the chaotic background of vines... the dress pattern gets lost. A solid color or simpler pattern might stand out better. The model's hair has no chance in the tangle.

Perhaps this looks better in print form... I'm sure there's a lot of texture and detail we're all missing in the relative low resolution of our respective computer monitors...

Interesting photo...but somehow it doesn't say anything to me. Some tips for improvement: Use more directional lighting (this lighting is very flat and contributes to the dull appearance). Use a model with darker hair or a hat. The blonde hair ruins this shot, as it melds with the background.

Chris, hang in here ! :-) Here's a photographer who really has nothing to prove: a simple glance at his portfolio will leave no doubt about his capabilities. And here he is now on Photo.net's front page with a picture which may not be his best, but which happens to raise questions, and, imo, to require a minimal amount of "fashion culture". And I am just amazed to see the first few comments before mine. Let me defend this picture for a while - although, again, I don't think this is among the most impressive pictures taken by this photographer... A few answers to a few comments in this thread...

 

1) The background is too busy...??

Did it occur to anyone that perhaps it was the exact reason why the photographer chose it ? Yes, of course, the background takes some attention away from the main subject, but this isn't a discount catalog page...:-) Look at this dress ? How much do you think it's for sale at ? No cheap stuff. Therefore the photographer in charge of this advertising assignment is supposed to give his photo some class, some mystery, something special in a way or another. Of course, anyone would think of a fairly neutral and simple background - no challenge there, no mystery, no class. Chris (or perhaps an art director?) takes up a challenge here, and I like that. The challenge is to avoid contrast and direct emphasis, and Chris goes for something more subtle. precisely, the model is meant to disappear in this background - at least at first glance. Yet, we do see the dress and the model shortly after. What's the point of this background then ? a) It's dead wood, and these are autumn or winter colors on the dress itself. The model becomes part of the season - that was the point.

 

2) The light is dull, not enough contrast, etc... of course not! It's autumn or winter in here. The model is supposed to be part of the season! So, what would we want this to look like ? Like a saturated summer beach scene ? Winter is dull, so she is dull. EXCEPT her hair - but the hair still tends to disappear in the wall's color as well. Why ? Well, imo, it allows to catch the viewer's attention a little as he flips the pages of a magazine or such. [My personnal opinion: while I respect the choice of a model with such hair, I think it would have been even more daring and interesting to get a read-hair model, who would disappear even more in the picture... A matter of taste in the end...]

 

3) The model looks stiff ? Anything else would fail the concept. She must be stiff like branches in winter, she must look frozen, she must create a quite impact. Should she smile or dance ? Certainly not. And she's skinny because the vines behind are as well; and she's got white hair to add snow to the winter...:-) It all fits.

 

All in all, a very good photo, which has the originality it takes to make an impression in today's over-saturated fashion world, which has the finesse it takes to make an elegan and subtle impression.

 

The goal wasn't to make the most flashy picture here: the goal was to be smart, and to amuse, seduce and intrigue the viewer. One may or may not fancy the result, but the picture makes perfect sense as it is.

 

The only thing I don't really fancy here: I feel the model is perhaps too strange and not beautiful or powerful enough for such a strong concept. I think her expression is a bit blank here, not just stiff, but flat... The picture is flat too, like the patterns of the dress, and that's perfectly ok for this concept, but shouldn't she somehow score higher on beauty and impact...? I'd say she should, but then again, one could say, that a stronger and more beautiful face could, in this context, overpower the dress... I would love to hear your view on this, Chris... Cheers.

This image has a very odd histogram -- entirely distributed over the lower half of the range, with much of it jammed up against the very bottom. Is that a sign that it was simply underexposed by a couple of stops? If the histogram is "stretched" out to remap it over the entire range of brightnesses, the image picks up some life. It's still flat -- both in the physical sense of being all pretty much in one plane, and in the sense of not having much of a range of color values -- but it isn't as drab.

I like the image, the visual impact of the weeds and the cloths is very unique and compelling. But when the elves say "consitancy in lighting", what I'm seeing is flatness of lighting. Yes the lighting works as it enables a basic good exposure, but I would really try to bump the contrast on this as it really lacks life as it is and could have so much more IMO.

Unless my English is lacking, what the Elves are saying is that the styling/wardrobe and lighting are consistent *with each other* - And there is the word "purposeful"... Meaning that both the dull lighting amd the background and the dress match a certain purpose. See my post above: I agree with the Elves.

This is the only image that I don't like out of[Chris's portfolio] the entirety. The rest are full of life, wonderfully emotive and incredibly captured. The overall yellow cast in this image is just dulling it way too much. It has no dynamic range at all.

 

I took the image into PS and remove the cast and pumped some contrast into it and it changed the whole appearance onf the image. It makes it a much more interesting image tonaly for me at least.

 

I do urge everone to visit the rest of Chris' gallery it is wonderful.

"This image has a very odd histogram -- entirely distributed over the lower half of the range, with much of it jammed up against the very bottom. Is that a sign that it was simply underexposed by a couple of stops?"

 

Answer: it is certainly not the sign of an underexposure. Just dull lighting, an overcast day in winter or such, with dark tones all over the frame in which you can still see details.

 

It is possible - not sure, just possible - that the photographer would have set the output of whites at 235 or such instead of 255 in the PS levels box, in order to add to this dullness. That's a simple way to tone down the colors and "tarnish" a bit further the contrasts, often used, for example, to avoid true whites and/or very flashy results for (highly contrasted) LED prints.

 

It is also possible that the weather alone - especially with this film, and in an eastern European country in winter - may have resulted in what you see. Etc. Etc.

 

What's weird is that a low contrast is still being called a lack of contrast. Maybe it's time to consider what's the purpose of this picture. Winter (or late autumn) colors and winter light for a winter collection - is that really such a strange thing ?!

The picture is striking. It is my personal taste but I wish the model looks sideway rather than AT me. Since she looks at me, her face is a focal point and that is distracting to the theme of the photo.

Mark G: You've left me with nothing to say-- well, less than nothing because you have the language and experience to say it more completely than I could.

 

Phew! I was feeling like a dolt for liking this picture for a while ;-)

Thanks for that observation about the exposure, Marc. But what photo were you thinking of when you wrote, "It is also possible that the weather alone - especially with this film, and in an eastern European country in winter - may have resulted in what you see." Details on this one say it was shot on June 5, 2004 in Lake Bluff, Illinois.

perhaps a red which's hat would of been the iceing on the cake. otherwise i dont see it much more than a fashion statement. Nice photo though.

For me, the subject is too minimal to her surroundings. Didn't look twice. Nuff said.

 

Chow.