Lucia

Framing a hairy ghost... head is lost in the hairy background, dress is almost levitating... indeed strange picture, a bit dull in contrast, color and tone, very end of automn.

Not my favorite, but quite interesting one at second thoughts... congrats Chris... for this POW and for all the great pictures you posted here

by the way, good critic from Marc G.

In my view this isn't a fashion shot at all. Get the feeling its rooted in Led Zepplin Houses of the Holy era...very similar artwork on "the song remains the same " vidio... "Modern medieval."

 

She isn't "lifeless", hard to get the zoom clear enough but looks more reflective. Medieval explains the dark, flat tones. Whats interesting is above her head the red object looks like a rose...only colour out of place.

 

I find this image interesting and mysterious, far from boring and with enduring quality. The colours blend perfectly with her hair...the green breaks this mono pattern but also shifts the geometrics.

 

Congrats Chris on one excellent pic..very deserving of POW and 7/7

Chris, I can't get your link to the closeup to work again. It worked once and then no more.

Lannie I think he wanted to give a link to his last post :

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2736973

 

Way better imo =)

Thanks, Oliver. That does show the detail, and it's a great shot in its own right, but the link above is to a close-up of the face. I can get the link to work when I am in the thread without the original picture, but if I come in from outside and click on PN and then on the picture, the link does not work for me.

 

This puzzles me.

 

Chris, would you consider posting the closeup as an inline picture no wider than 511 pixels, and with a title? Then it should display without having to click on it.

Here is the link to the closeup: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2738467

Thanks, Chris. That is well worth the trouble of punching in the numbers. I am glad to see that on the closeup even the irises of her light eyes are visible, allowing one to view the face with considerable detail without losing the ghostly effect.

 

Great work!

To be a fashiong photo it is great and different to what I have usually seem. Colours are just perfect but I think blonde hair does not work well here, It doesnt help with the definition of the face (the face is miss), maybe a model with black or brown hair would have framed better the face.

remembering Leanardo da venci's drawing

A beautiful image Chris, congrats. I've long admired your excellent work.

On seeing your closeup I took the liberty of playing with it a little...this possibly offers a little more drama to her rather dramatic outfit. With this darkened background her blonde hair works wonderfully.

http://pics1.homestead.com/files/file2/image2.jpg

I like it more as I think I know that model's dress is also designed by the photographer. And yes, the new fashion stuff goes simple with no expression faces on models. Congratulations Chris.

it would have been awesome if her hair was exaclty the same color as the vines.

I don't think it's the face, hair, or lighting that's unsettling, it's that the feet are missing. The model apears to be rising or floating. I think it's very rich and nicely done. It's not about the model, it's about the beautiful fashion statement which has been pulled off very well. I would love to have that piece in my wardrobe. I like, Chris, the way you have made the main subject remain the main focal point and made the model fade. I also like the eeriness of the mannequin being outside the show window instead of peering at us from behind the window pane. Lots of unusual things going on, that's okay, keep it up, great work!

ngzb

Here's the blowup cropped a bit tighter, with no other changes made.

Excellent alternative input Amelie... I would have even gone for a square (cropping the right part).

.....but certainly different.

The inanimate model is boring but then is the model just a clothesrack!

 

The location including the window behind and the clothing/model are excellent.

 

The lighting is flat and lifeless just like the model. Photography is about light, here the

rule is the exception but it doesn't work. Clarence white or Ortiz-Echague it isn't.

 

Chris need prove nothing he is far ahead of most of us here at pn. Hopefully this exposure

will introduce lots of members to his inspirational portfolio.

Louis

I really like this piece, bold, different, good contrast.....and I do feel that this highly compressed web version isn't doing the quality of the image justice!

Magnificent work nevertheless!

Congrats again Chris!

- steve chong -

http://www.stevechong.com

Photoshop! That is what I see when I look at your picture. The outcome you produce is wonderfull dont get me wrong. Im having a mental battle on what is photography and what is graphic art. I guess im becoming a purest in my older age. My definition is if you can tell that photoshop is part of your image then it is graphic art. Unfortunatly this site is full of it. Graphic art that is. Your photographs are wonderfull. So is your graphic art.

So simple. The model has a manaquin look to her, and it doesn't detract at all IMHO. I prefer the way she fades into obsecurity, and what is left, is the coat.

 

It's almost as if she is part of the vines, rising from the center, the living remains, the mother of a plant that has given up to winter.

 

Head back, arms out, and a holy beam of light would have been a nice touch too for another shot.

Travis, your second paragraph is probably the most poetic thing that has ever been written on photo.net.

 

Those lines do capture the essence of the image, I believe.

I didn't click on the POW thread until today because I had already seen this photo (and loved it) when it was uploaded and I figured the thread would be all unspecific praise and kudos. I was pleasantly surprised to see a liveley debate and I was surprised to see the number of boo birds and the reasons for the boos.

 

I love the work. This shot and Chris's portfolio in general provide a glimpse of what excellent photography looks like through the eyes of an experienced photographer who, not only likes low contrast, natural light images but, thinks they are superior to the alternatives. Perhaps it doesn't meet peoples contrast level expectations but, that's a good thing when you are unique.

 

This is a beautiful shot that is uniquely styled. One of the things I like (besides the light, earthy colors, and contrast) is how comfortable she appears in front of the bare vines. As if she only comes out at that time of the year when foilage is barren, it adds a clue to what her personality may be like.

This is one of the most striking graphic images I have seen on photo.net. The relatively flat contrast works well to emphasize the almost two-dimensional, static quality of the composition. "Static" is not often cited as a compositional virtue, but the square format is static by its very nature.

 

The subject strikes me as enchanted, imprisoned within the vines. Her hopeless expression and lack of feet reinforce this effect. This photo conveys more than "beautiful person, beautiful clothes."

Ok I use to use a program called Poser and this looks just liek a render that would come out of that program to a T... I mean this is good and all but she looks stiff and unlife like. I like the colors and details though.

I like it Chris. It's about the dress, not a model. And it's slightly surreal with her head poppin' out of that dress as if the whole thing was floating or hanging on that bizarre wall. The light is where I have doubts -- since you went for complementary colors I think that a little more contrast in light wouldn't hurt -- unless you did not want more texture at all? congrats, maria.

I can critize the form but hardly the content I'm afraid...

I sometimes see 100x100 pixels forums avatars which "say it all", not one more pixel needed. Here and now, let's face it, I can't see shite. I can't see relief, can't see lighting, can't see contrast, can't see patterns on the cassock (who said it's a fine fashion shot? look at the collar and at the sleeves: you can hardly make out the patterns details nor the texture of the material!), can hardly see the model's face (is she smiling? are her eyes closed? is there any make-up beside the red lipstick?), can't see whether it's a real painted wall or a photoshop layer, etc...

Of course I'm not so blind and dumb, just exaggerating a little... I would probably have enjoyed this picture (from a definitely talented photographer like Chris B.) if it had been larger... as it is now it doesn't look as significant as what it could have been in high res, IMVHO.