'Ella II'

This is model Ella. Your ratings, critiques and observations are

invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly, very critically or

wish to make a remark, please submit a helpful and constructive

comment; please share your photographic knowledge to help improve my

photography. Thanks! Enjoy! John

This is B&W photography at its finest.

I love the fine detail of her skin, while the lighting renders her identity nearly completely in shadow. The fact that you can just see her left eye adds even more allure to this image.

Beautiful shot, beautiful model, fantastic technique...keep it up.

Well done!

I started out taking 'ordinary' shots with studio lighting (I had portable strobes) with me -- very high quality.

Then, out of frustration at getting photos that seemed too mainstream, I moved Ella toward the window where she was backlit by northern light, placed her on a sofa, said "let's make some 'art'" and took a few photos in totally natural light, far more to my liking.   Strobes have their place, but I love side lighting (and even back lighting) and just manipulating or using available light.

This is one of those photos.

I'm glad this one pleases you.

john

John (Crosley)

Pardon me for misspelling your name.

If the editing feature were not closed I could fix it without notice, but that's gone now.

Again, apologies.

john

John (Crosley)

Excellent lighting, model and b&w!!

Thank you so much for the compliments.

john

John (Crosley)

I echo David's comments...............

Love the skin texture........ the model looks "real".

Well done to you both.

Regards

Thank you for an enlightening comment, especially for noting that the model looks 'real'.

She's an amateur, result of a 'talent hunt' and it's her first foray at modeling.  This is one that turned out very successfully.  It helps to have good people skills when dealing with young women new to posing and not to pose a threat to them, as I do not approach them.

If she sees this, I hope that she is proud; we're now out of touch but her photo(s) is/are memorable and fitting tribute to her 'moment', as I doubt she ever posed again.

Thanks again, Grayham.

john

John (Crosley)

I agree that this is a wonderful nude portrait, John. If she is an amateur she has a wonderful sense for posing and working the light. The use of natural light and B&W are terrific. The necklace adds a nice touch and I also like that her eyes are not lost in the shadow. You have also captured one of my favorite details, the bit of light on the shadow side nipple, which also adds much to the photograph.

Beautiful natural light!

Thank you for the compliments.

In my view for photographing women who have just entered womanhood, and have very youthful faces and figures (and if the photo will stand it), the eyes seem to be one point of emphasis that I pay special attention to in my portraits.  If there is ONE thing that I will pay special attention to in almost every photo almost no matter what the subject, it is the eyes -- for that seems to be the visual reference. 

I watch first for focus then for lightness/brightness and contrast, and adjust if needed.  The differences between dark eyes (except in shadows here of course) and slightly brightened eyes that show some luminescence and/or color can make or break a photo, I have found, and few if any will know why they notice the difference if eyes are slightly brightened -- but they will almost always notice the difference subliminally. 

Also, whenever they are deserving in their shape, the breasts and nipples also start to break down fairly rapidly in many women, get fat, change shape or age rather rapidly over time and/or with childbearing.   Breasts and nipples seem to be a second reference, at least for males, so attention spent on portraying them well is time well spent.

Few women are lucky enough to have have breasts shaped like this model's, even as younger women, and Ella's pose intentionally took advantage of her fine breasts and breast details, especially with the gorgeous lighting here as you and others have noted.

Many men, without knowing they have a predilection, find such a presentation attractive without even knowing they have an attraction to the somewhat rare shape and posing that sets off a strong personal reaction until they view the combination in a well-lighted photo. 

Perhaps it's wired into the male genes for some?

Thanks again for a thoughtful and articulate remark.

john

John (Crosley)

Yes, the light is gorgeous isn't it?

I think it's northerly light in a slightly overcast day, later afternoon, as I seem to recall.

I will experiment with almost anything, from almost any angle and just work from there.  This is one experiment that worked out well.

Thank you for the compliment.

john

John (Crosley)

You are right about strobes John.  I will almost always favor the natural "free" light when it's available.  You ended up with some nice "split lighting" which lends itself to make a good moody, artistic image.  This is highlighted by the fact that the light is striking her breasts and nipples in such a way that it emphasizes their beauty, and the perfect focus has picked up her skin texture wonderfully.  Well done!  (Don't forget to leave comments and critiques for your peers as well!) 

Very well explained.

There's not much for me to say except thanks for a well-made comment.

john

John (Crosley)

xxx

Good crop.

I'll keep it in mind.

Very helpful.

Thanks.

john

John (Crosley)

In my opinion with your crop you have taken a somewhat artistic photo and made it into a piece of art.

Thank you so much for the crop and the enterprise and selflessness in showing me.

I truly appreciate it. 

Credit where credit is due.

john

John (Crosley)

xx

Very, very, very nice.

I'm completely inexperienced in such things and bow not only to your expertise, but to your considerable experience, PLUS the wonderful sense of aesthetics revealed in the crop and frame/matte.

It makes me wonder, not having seen your exhibited work, why you gave up on exhibiting your work.  If it had half as much talent as you showed in this simple crop of my work, I would have expected it to be well received.

Are your framed photos still in that storage locker you wrote of once long ago?

john

John (Crosley)

From time to time people make cropping suggestions.  

Some are good, some are ill thought out, and a few are completely absurd.

In general I am opposed to cropping, but not always.  I do love to frame in camera.  If I had 'seen' this crop of yours in my camera (fat chance) I would have framed and taken it, but I was too inexperienced.

If a fair to middling capture with some artistic aspirations can be brought to a higher standard as you have done with your simple, but elegant crop, I am all in favor of that.

Helmut Newton's private printer confided to me once that in almost every case with his Hasselblad (I recall), Newton shot practically every photo to be cropped, in part because the aspect ration of 1:1 was generally just not the right aspect ratio and in part because he preferred to capture everything and frame later.

I prefer generally to do otherwise, and it's great training, but if someone can really IMPROVE my captures through a great crop, (emphasis on GREAT) I have no objection, and in this instance, I have nothing but praise for this terrific crop.

It is absolutely the best crop suggestion made to me in my eight plus years here at Photo.net and probably in my career (including the suggestions of a Lucie Award winner whose suggestions sometimes were remarkable and who also was a recognized art critic with a worldwide reputation, now disabled and out of the business.)

As I said, I prefer to frame in the camera, but even if I intend to crop, I  seldom crop when I post here, just to give members freedom to give me feedback such as you have given here.

Kudos and thanks.

john

John (Crosley)

Yes, still in storage and will remain there until the lock is cut. I do not exhibit now because (A) I was "not that good", and (B) I no longer care to loose money. I no longer hang in my own home because I no longer put holes in  the walls. I occasionally print a photo I really like but I don't frame it; don't matte it and therefore sits in a box with the others in the corner of one of my rooms and once in a great while I take them out and look at them and I am astonished with their importance even though no else thinks they are worth a damn. Now you know all about me.

Henri Cartier-Bresson in his own words and those of an observer or several in his gorgeous flat in Paris remarked he had NO photos of his own on display.

The only photo on exhibit was the classic photo of Martin Muncasi of the three Black African youths racing into a lake, a near perfect composition taken on the fly, which is the composition/photo that started Cartier-Bresson thinking seriously that photography for him could be an art, a form of 'instant drawing' that suited his fast-moving and mercurial personality.

Source, various videos of Cartier-Bresson which started out as films plus the Charlie Rose interview.

I have found that photos I took in my 20s when I wandered the streets with my new camera and took what I thought were interesting 'street photographs' including one precious one from my absolute first roll ever have not only endured but are some of my finest, and one of those is from my first role ever and some others have become historical documents.

I am told that by an expert or several.

If you are paying storage locker fees, you are already paying money. It is clear to me from just one clever crop that while I have not seen your work and you  have confided that you are old and have a debilitating disease, that was your life's work, you were intimately involved in the lifestyle, and the photographing was your passion.

It might be in retrospect that your work, seen through new and more modern eyes and a historical perspective might have more worth than you ever imagined. 

It'd be a shame to never know for sure, when you're still obviously in love with the avocation/profession, to see if now your work will hold water that previously was overlooked.

Tastes in the art community change.

Van Gogh learned to paint in the brown school of the old Dutch Master, and never was truly accepted during his lifetime, but look at his work's acceptance now, and how over time it changed. then the kudos his work currently receives -- earlier works now are considered masterpieces that then were unrecognized.  Van Gogh's personal and sexual behavior didn't help matters much (See the Wikipedia article on his life for an overview).

Not having seen your photos exhibited (and not knowing the name under which you exhibited) I'm at a disadvantage, plus I'm under a further disadvantage because I don't completely understand the ingrown world of galleries, collecting and museum exhibition.

I am continually going through my older captures with a new and renewed eye, re-examining old (and new) captures through newfound knowledge and sense of aesthetics, and it has frequently yielded wonderful results.

You dedicated your earlier life to the pursuit of photography (nudes) and obviously obtained expertise; that your prior dealer/rep abandoned you may have been more to do with your impetuousness than your talent . . . . . is a supposition I have nurtured . . . . as you sometimes show an in-your-face and impetuous attitude.

Have you reassessed?  Would it be worthwhile?

What will happen to your work when you are no longer around to pay the storage fees?

My guess is that there is some worthwhile and perhaps greater work there that deserves  a  new look.

It would be a shame to see it destroyed or abandoned without a second look and a chance at giving Meir Samel a photo legacy other than Photo.net (in his real name, not a Photo.net assumed name.)  I unaware of your exhibition name (real name?) so my quest too see all your work ends on Photo.net.

Thanks for recent able help and some able help on tonality in the past of which you are aware; it has helped my work well, and I don't forget such kindnesses.

john

John (Crosley)

I cannot say I have seen what you have in storage or that I even 'get' gallery, museum, or collector worthy photos.

But do you have first class scans or really adequate scans that can be worked with and put on web sites.

There are places other than Photo.net to put your work; Smugmug.com Photobucket.com, FLCKR, and private web sites; lots of other places.

Photo.net is somewhat ingrown, and maybe not the best place to become 'known'; Vivian Maier's work was exposed on FLICKR and almost overnight there were book and film offers when Maloof asked for feedback from their hard core street forum about the worth of her work.

He was atonished at the feedback and so much of it so quickly.

You would never expect that the PN membership; FLCKR is a bigger audience, though for my money, not nearly as sophisticated in general.  In some sense, there's a great many amateurs on this site and a good size group of very accomplaished photographers whose work anchors the site, while many very accomplished photographers from this site have moved on.

Perhaps it would give you pleasure to show your work (if you have not) on some other forum where it's low cost like Photobucket.com (free or $25 for Pro) or Smugmug.com which is more expensive but offers sales possibilities.

You don't have to cease participation here.

If, with your skills and sensibilities you think your work is very important, maybe someone else of standing does also, and you may still have a last smile.

Based on certain idiosyncratic personality traits I've observed, I'm wondering if they did not interfere with your last agent whom you wrote seemed to have abandoned you as a person possibly because of 'differences' rather than your work not being of adequate quality. 

That's just my uneducated 'impression' based on six or so years interaction here.

it's possible your advancing age will affect the worth of your work (after all it's now nearly a complete life's work), and although you still have some piss and vinegar, you also I recall are a doting older relative, and that may have mellowed you somewhat in the eyes of those who would work with you.

If you value your work so much, I would suggest you not give up.

I wouldn't.

Times and values change; what was yesterday's outcast is today's 'in' thing.

Remember Henny Youngman, the comedian?

'Take my wife, please?'

For a long time, he was the epitome of the Catskills comedian, who hit it big with the help of the Ed Sullivan show.

Then he became a cliche, working the lounges and showrooms of Las Vegas for the blue haired lady crowd and the salesmen who kept America's businesses humming.  He was a yuck a minute, literally.

At the end, the college and young people crowd discovered him, once again.

Same act, same yucks, but suddenly he was 'in' once again.

He was so uncool, he was seen by youths as 'cool' because he was really so one of a kind and extraordinarily clever.

He did not reinvent himself; he was the subject of vogue.

Society reinvented him.

Maybe it's time for Meir Samel's work to be in 'vogue', maybe a first time, and not wait to be posthumously successful.

But then I don't know under what name you formerly exhibited nor have I seen anything except the work here on PN so this is speculative.

john

John (Crosley)

Food for thought.

re; your posted question/comment but irrelavant to your posted photo. The snapshop is the only photo in the last folder on my photo.net site. Some are and some are not posted on photo.net. The photo on the left is in "not people" folder. Below it is a bio and list of all the titles.