Untitled

Comments welcome

Wow... very different and imaginative.

nice texture

beautiful and very sophhisticated photo - I wish I had a print!

beautiful and astonishing. I love the way the background's tone matches the skin's tone. How sa that achieved?

Very nice shot. Very original idea. Good composition and use of negative space. Tones and texture add so much here.

 

Well done.

 

Alexis

 

www.alexisneel.com

Michal, very nice work.Cong.

different, very nice....

This is the kind of picture that would worsen with analyzing. Simply excellent!

great talent!

The tones make this shot,very nice.

Very nice. Texture and composition are top-notch

Striking picture, I winced when I saw it at first, but then I admired the power of teh shot

Different, original... unique.

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. It is simply an image that the Elves found interesting and worthy of discussion. Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Site Feedback forum.

When including images, please make sure they are relevant to the discussion, not more than 511 pixels wide, sufficiently compressed and make sure to enter a caption when uploading.

Good choice. An almost metonymical, symbolic image (the touch of a woman). The retro feel looks natural. I like the silver enamel on the nails. Deceivingly 'simple' images like this one are the most difficult to carry off. It's just like good pop music: it may be hummable but try and write it yourself.

Perhaps I'm not seeing it well. Perhaps what I see as a tremendous amount of dust and scratches are, in a print, the texture of plaster. Is this an intentional texture effect? Am I seeing some sort of highly textured paper?

 

This appears to be badly printed and scanned, or just badly scanned, but it's a beautiful concept and could be a beautiful finished print with a great deal more work. It deserves that work.

 

I apologize for harsh comments. Perhaps my monitor is at fault.

 

IMO the negative should be dusted, the scan redone to open the shadows a little, remaining dust should be eliminated in post-processing, grain reduced...possibly with gaussian blur in Photoshop or Elements.

Sorry:

I like artistic photography; Sudek, Myerowitz, Eggleston (now and then), Mapplethorpe... This is a case of the Emperor not wearing any clothes. There are dust (?) spots that mar the hand, the contrast is far too harsh for delicacy, etc.

Les

to john kelly: although you may not like the overall effect (scratches, texture, etc) i believe this was probably intended, and not the result of a terrible scan. Whether or not it works is another issue entirely, but i wonder if your recommendations would completely change the feeling of this photo?

Jamie, the image was well seen but seems badly executed technically.

 

I don't think the look was intended. It's coarse-looking for a 6X6 negative. One specific result is that the hand's age is exaggerated by the grain/contrast...

 

Perhaps what I dislike was intentional. But it strikes me as accident and that takes away from impact.

 

I see it 11" square on a high resolution flat screen monitor, very neutral B&W. It looks better smaller.

 

What size do you see this image?

John, if we had a betting system I would put my money on intentional, I'm pretty sure the things that you point out as errors are meant to by that way. At least it is my appreciation from observing the other photos on his portfolio. A fine trumpe l'oeil.

I believe in this situation the technique calls undue attention to itself and therefore fails the photograph. The lighting is also rather pedestrian.

Great image. I'm not sure of the intent of the photographer, but this isn't a sexy photo. The texture of the print in general, along with the disparity between the feminine curve of the torso, and the slightly-Manish, meaty hand make this a bit creepy.

 

I get the feeling that the hand might not belong to the body.

Crisdian, the B&Ws in the portfolio are consistent but don't seem skilled enough to be "intentional." I think they just reflect his early-stage technical skills. He should re-shoot when he has more control over B&W.

 

The hair photo is standard-issue fashion portfolio imagery, not worthy of his other photos. The lighting or scan is too harsh, but hair product clients do sometimes like that.

 

The butt/hand, hand/curve, and butt/foot photos have tremendous promise, are startling in two cases, but should be re-shot when his B&W processing/scanning technique is better. He should not show these versions of the compositions.

 

He's got far more vision than skill, which is to his credit. In a year his images will be far better.

 

One butt shot is blurred due to movement. The shot deserves better.

 

The Coke bottle shot is obviously a portfolio piece: The glass doesn't shine... an ad agency for a bottled product such as Coke would not like the lighting because it takes away from the copywritten look of the product.

 

IMO this is someone starting to learn studio lighting. I'm not knocking his "art," I'm saying his craftsmanship needs attention.

I don't believe the hand belongs to a man, it is the same hand used in a similar photo with the same model. I do believe that the scratches were done on purpose, and to be honest, I am glad that they were not put there with Photoshop (unlike the previous POW). Too much texture.

 

As far as if the texture helps the photograph, I am not sure. I like the background, but if it were up to me, I'd leave the model unscratched to give it a more dimensional appeal, Other than that, very original.