Untitled

Any commments appreciated, thanks!

~D.

Primadonna ? Very nice indeed. The B/W tones work great here. I would not have cropped out her left arm though. It seems a slight lack of harmony in the composition. Just a detail after all :)

Beautiful and classic. I especially love the warm tone.

Gorgeous image, beautifully timed with a lovely model. Well done!!

Great portrait Dmitry, composition, focus, dof, isolation from background, all well done, 6/6

Beautiful work. Thanks you.

Lovely image, beautiful tones and detail, atttractive model and pose but she looks a little stunned which is offputting. Great work!

Fantastic portrait!!

Wonderful photo, well done. I have been contributing to the debate recently on chopped-out limbs, fingers, unstraigthened horizons etc. Allow me to say once again that few of the professionals or well known magazines pay attention to such a detail. These are textbook considerations and have little to do with the overall impact of a photo.

This is a fine image indeed, all very well done technically. My question is, how did you get all of these 50's photos? Were you working on a movie set or something? A beautiful model, I would add!

Regards, Todd

Such a classic portrait complimented by the light tone. Could easily be a still shot from a movie set or something, beautiful image Dmitry.

Lovely picture and awesome model's expression! Well done. Congrats. Marina

Please note the following:

• This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest.
• Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Help & Questions Forum.
• The About Photograph of the Week page tells you more about this feature of photo.net.
• Before writing a contribution to this thread, please consider our reason for having this forum: to help people learn about photography. Visitors have browsed the gallery, found a few striking images and want to know things like why is it a good picture, why does it work? Or, indeed, why doesn't it work, or how could it be improved? Try to answer such questions with your contribution.

I like props. Here I have just a little quibble with one. Namely,that the big puffy fur stole/boa almost overwhelms the lady's delicate, elfin face. Has the feel in a way of a little girl in the attic trying on mom's old garments. And that is not bad if the intent. If it the wrap were smaller, or the photo in color where the separation was more evident, then I humbly suggest it would better 'balance' the portrait as a whole. Which of course is quite lovely work I admire, Dimitri, so pls do not misread my one criical comment. aloha,gs

Gerry, interesting observation about the stole. I thought it might be helpful to compare it to this photo of Marlene Dietrich:

http://xmages.net/out.php/i87470_MarleneDietrich.jpg

Of course, Dietrich was a one-of-a-kind model, and her face and expression had no trouble competing with her clothing and accoutrements. As a matter of fact those things made her portraits that much stronger and unique. I think props, clothing, boas, etc. can really add to a good portrait, so I think that would be a good starting point. How to make them work. Looking at the picture of Dietrich, of course, she was often handled with much more contrast and severity. This portrait is obviously more demur and not meant to be as dramatic as many of the Hollywood thirties and forties stuff.

Technically, I think this is an excellent portrait. The lighting is soft and flattering, the clothing, I think, is fine, and the details all read extremely well. What I find lacking is expression, both in the subject's face and from the photographer. Though her eyes are beautiful and beautifully lit, reflecting the catch lights quite nicely, I don't find myself engaged, either with her or with what or where she may be looking. I feel unconnected to the subject. In order for that connection to take place, I don't think she has to be looking at the camera by any means. Perhaps there's a stiffness with which the woman holds her head and hands that is keeping me at a distance. And though her eyes are obviously focused on something, there seems no particular mystery conveyed that leads me to wander or wonder along with her. I think were there a bit more coming from both the model and photographer, the boa would not be distracting.

I pretty much agree with what has been said here so far. But I might go a bit further.

The light is nice and the props are great, but then I think we get let down in the transaction of the photograph.

First, I find the contemporary "California Casual" styling of the model's hair and makeup a bit disconcerting. With this much attention to the wardrobe and set I think that this oversight is almost egregious. A woman of this classic and formal period would never be so casual--and certainly not this contemporary.

But maybe Fred hits on the biggest issue and that is the lack of anything going on. If we compare the Dietrich photo, we have that wonderful one point perspective where everything in the photo sweeps us right to her, including the dynamics of her own arms. Then her stare, riveting and yet aloof to our pitiful existence.

Here, there is just a total lack of any dynamic in my opinion. The hands are so awkwardly lifting the veil and everything , including the lines of the fur and arms just so static--it feels like the photographer was saying "hold it" but had to change film before he could shoot and all life and tension drained from the model and the scene. We were then left with just a pose, and an awkward one at that. Yes, no engagement or believability or any way to connect.

For me, going through most of Dmitry's work, this isn't a common issue and here again maybe we have a weak link posted and then picked for the world to see. I like how Dmitry has, in the other work, depicted a time past, substantially ignoring social mores of the time-on purpose? in many of his shots. But this one just isn't up to the other work, although the light and tones are very nice.

As a thematic work, I can accept the lifted veil, as a "what have we up there,now?" moment of self reveal that is cute. Technically, I like the lighting, no quibbles there. It is not a photo that would have much "sticking power" as a stand alone image to me,but that is true of a lot of stuff that we get and most of what I have shot too,no problem. Is why maybe I never look at the POW author's gallery until I have reacted and said something in my head and decided to comment.. I don't want to be influenced by style history .. Why, because I am looking to see an image as a Picture of the week not Pictures of the week sequence,--- a matter of personal approach we don't have to agree upon and I know many don't ; not a problem at all.... Marlene , ah yes, a real stunner for the big image camera, luminous,seductive and exotic, bold stare.

She looks anxious, as though she's been surprised playing with clothes whose semiotic values aren't hers.

This one is truly gorgeous. I just love the way the relatively low contrast and warm tones work together on this one. What a relief from the overly contrasty and over the top color saturation that is so much in vogue these days. You do know how to work a B&W image, that's for sure.

Beautiful and gorgeous portrait. Your decision to present this in black and white works well. Great tones and detail. I would only suggest you to re-touch a little the catch-lights in her eyes as this is overlaping the white of the eye. Congrats.

I will agree with all the positives noted by Fred Goldsmith before, but will unfortunately agree as well with ALL the negatives addressed by Fred and John A in their respective comments. Lack of a good hairstyle, empty gaze and artficiality of the arms posture being the main negatives in my view. Hand and arm ending in a strange way being another minor issue in my view. But bottom line, for me, this portrait is just "quite good", whereas I'm really enthusiastic about most of Dimitry's work - especially with his way to present couples with great depth in the frame separating man and woman. There are so many great pictures in his portfolio, that I find this particular image a bit plain and empty - and even flat in terms of lighting -; compared to the rest of Dimitry's work, which I love, this is imo a lot weaker... I'd by far have prefered to discuss the strong points of one of his best images...

WOW! That was my first reaction, but here we are supposed to address strenghts and weaknesses of a photo, not just say whether we like it or not. The main reason why I like it is that it gives life to that kind of lifeless portrait photo shot in the 40'. Her clothes hint at that time, but her face, her hair, her look - not staring expressionless towards the photographer as it seemed appropriate at that time - is something that, at an emotional level, is what I miss when I look at my grandpa's photo.

It seems likely that she will speak in a split second. Her eyes are not empty, rather the scene is simple. If she had earrings the general impression would be bad.

I think some are looking for a replication of an earlier time. The portrait is more a retro interpretation by the photographer. Standing on it's own, it's beautifully done. There's excellent toning and detail in the blacks. I really don't have a problem with her expression either

im in agree with rebecca . she looks anxious and it can abviously readable from her eyes , this kind of portrait is not suitabale for the model i think and the model never intend to print such a anxious like portrait for herself. the composition and skin tone and also moment hunting is very good i think .
best regards<<<<amir49>>>>