Nina III (Smiling Eyes)

This is a 'street portrait' of Nina, friend and assistant. Nina has an

amazing variety of minute and very subtle facial gestures by which she

expresses herself -- here more obviously, 'Smiling Eyes'. Your ratings

and critiques are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly or very

critically or just wish to share your observations, please submit a helpful

and constructive comment; please share your photographic knowledge

to help me become a better photographer. Thanks! Enjoy! John

I welcome your return.

John (who flew 8,000 miles today, and also is tired, having had 3 hours sleep in the two previous nights.

John (Crosley)

Like a previous and very good photo of Nina, this photo was taken in a McDonald's restaurant, accounting for light that is not optimal.

For me, although I have portable umbrellas and soft boxes and both 'hot' and 'flash' professional monoblock lighting, one of my strengths, I think, it being able to take a photo almost anywhere. the lights are for pure studio work and that primarily to teach me (1) how to control light and (2) how to take photos 'fast' and 'almost anywhere' without consideration or need for pro lighting.

I see little reason, except for lighting and direction of lighting, why one cannot take a good or sometimes 'great' photo in a McDonald's restaurant, abroad.

One probably should not be in one domestically (in the USA) as the quality of the food just is not comparable, and sometimes a french fry, cooked hot, served so hit it burns the fingers and cooked so well it's almost as though it were on supper table in France, can be just the thing for some good conversation and maybe a shot or two (as here).

Although staff and managers will sometimes caution 'no photos', they seldom intervene if you are shooting others up close.

John (Crosley)

She is really lovely and has wonderful emerald eyes! But this is not directly a merit of the photographer! :-)

The photographer was able to choose the right crop and frame to produce a portrait that punches.

I like it!

You know, John, when a photo is "right" there is not much to say.

I am surprised that nobody noticed this one.

My feeling that here on photo.net everything is much to fast! To understand a photo you need to take your time and I believe that there are a lot of so called "critics" here who simply rush from one photo to the other.

There might be also a mis-understanding of the rating system. 4 is average. Average means not outstanding, with no particular faults and no particular merits, no particular originality: 4. To rate lower than 4 there need to be evident flaws.

I do not understand these anonymous "3's". Ok, there are a lot of thin-skinned people here (and everywhere) but it would be better to declare ratings explicitly. And, much better, to comment.

But it is difficult to observe, to judge and thus to critique. It takes time, patience, study and care. Critiquing properly means to create one's own evaluation framework, combining cultural background, sensitiveness, knowledge of aesthetic canons. Few people do it.

It's ludicrous when somebody just critiques "wow". What does it mean?

There are maybe seven or eight photos of Nina scattered throughout my portfolio, and each one is quite different, even two 'street' photos, one in a Metro, hair blowing as a train approaches and another in a late hours restaurant with a couple smooching in the background.

My view is that she actually has become more beautiful with time, in part because she is more sophisticated at showing her good looks and partly because her looks are better shown with her 'slight' maturity (still well under 30 but above 25).

I think also she knows now better how to dress and present herself better_; she now has considerable interplay with various models,which she did not have before, though she came to me as a model who stayed around.

We've become good friends, and she's my trusted 'right hand' person. And worthy of that title, too.

I'd trust her with my life, and occasionally have, plus her advice and judgment is extremely reliable, which is something I can say for few women (or men), I've known well and been friends with her-- usually one must make allowance for judgment flaws with friends/ assistants, but not with Nina, whom friends seek out for calm, measured advice.

What a true blessing; so although she is very beautiful, I experience her 'inner beauty' which even surpasses her exterior beauty.

Too bad she's taken. ;~))

As to ratings, I take the photographs, I don't generally rate, to avoid being seen as a dreaded mate-rater, and at least at one time that was an extremely good choice; now I'm just too busy getting my life back in order after several catastrophes and still trying to make room to keep up my prodigious photographic output, with some work of high quality.

So, if people don't recognize this as 'high quality' tough for them. I don't take down low-rated photos. Sooner or later a highly skilled critic, such as yourself comes along, and recognizes what I see - -a photo of a beautiful woman well taken, and unusually so, as well.

That's really all I need to keep shooting -- the possibility of one rater with trustworthiness as a critic like yourself (to me at least) to come along and say' this one has 'punch', because it does have punch in my eyes.

So,I think you are not flattering me especially, (or I'd put a stop to that -- why buy flattery?)

Bought flattery has no worth at; although the cognoscenti, and many better and older members are among that group.

Best to you, Luca,.

You are always welcome here.

With flattering comments or critical ones, as they are deserved.

Just so long as they're honest, which they always are from you.

john

John (Crosley)