by Peri John

untitled johnperi artistic portrait glamour fine art nude p peri john

Gallery: Glamour Photography 2

Tags: johnperi artistic portrait glamour fine-art nude photography

Category: Uncategorized

Published: Sunday 15th of September 2002 12:25:17 AM


Luca Baldassarre
Very interesting picture and well done too. I think the picture is good as it is now, John is right, cutting her feet off would imply cutting some magazine and that is bad. L.

John Peri
Rather clumsily made - just to pass the time ... it was raining outside (as Timo knows, all the good weather was up North this summer)! Good idea regarding the date! Not too sure about cutting the feet off though, I would be left with less magazine?!

Timo Hartikainen
yeah, an original idea. I'd crop her feet out.

Timo Hartikainen
about cropping the feet, yes, it's not so good idea, but I just thought that it's better than those weird looking feet. I'd crop it to the knees or so, don't know if it would be any better then.

Ken Williams ...
8-9 Well, is interesting and not bad for sure ! ....... Change the dates on the Vogue covers and it looks like one of those Lana Turner posters from the 40's .............. Was going to comment on the shape of her foot but hell, who's looking at her foot anyway ................. (-;

Detlef Klahm
original and very well executed!

John Peri
Thanks a lot .... but I still think it would need some work still ... anyway ... Some of you will have noticed that the young lady has also taken a ride in a Gondola! http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=694401

Laura E. Napolitano
I am not normally fond of nudes but I like this! I thought to myself "awww how cute, a little sunbathing fairy!" Just my take on it. :)

John Peri
I fully agree with you. As I said above, this is rather shabby work very hurriedly done. I must try to find the patience to start over! Did you see her in the gondola?

dead fish
Hi John, It's an excellent idea, but it does not look too real. First, sharpness / lighting patterns are different for both compoents. Note that the rear end of the magazine is out of focus, yet model's legs are in focus. The light on the magazines is pretty dull, and the model seems to be lit by a strong studio light; there's no shadow of the model; and her hair seem a bit unnatural. I'm not sure where was the original photo taken, but perhaps if you put her on a mattres that is supposed to "emulate" those magazines, her pose would be more natural. You may want to re-shoot the magazines with some studio light and high aperture to avoid out of focus parts. Also consider getting rid of the thing (what is it?) in the background. I'm not trying to be picky, but helpful. I love the idea, and I enjoy your work, controversial yet not forced (I do not mean "controversial" as in taking nude shoots, but "controversial" as in trying odd color / composition schemes and making things work fine). Best regards, Second

Robert Makus
A pretty neat idea. Your eye should go right to the girl and stay there. But it's way too busy. That table cloth has to go. The red of the magazine is too much too. Robert Makus

John Peri
Many thanks to all of you for your useful comments. Next time we have a rainy weekend, I'll try and do something different with it!

David Montroy
Good idea.

Jim Martin
Ha! I agree that it's not a technical triumph or anything, but what a cool idea! It's a cross between Marilyn Monroe in Playboy and the scene in the Beatles' movie "Help!" which features a shrunken and nude Paul McCartney amongst giant household items.

Next Image >>