Published: Thursday 29th of May 2008 02:33:51 PM
Great capture of mood and perfect skin trones, John!! Best regards, Rakesh.
Thank you Artur, I appreciate that.
I tried to crop and desaturate. Not sure of the result, but I think it is a beautiful photo which deserved a try. Regards Lennart
I tend to agree with your assesment John, but more so with the background which is behind what she is looking at, in this case I take it to be the wine glass. Apart from that, I see the anticipated calibre of work you share with us all John, in this case a rather charming one at that. Artur
While the background may be busy, I find that it helps in disguising the pose to make it look more natural, lifelike
Thanks Rakesh .. just a pleasant moment when she relaxed and let go .. I sometimes prefer these to the portraits taken before and after ..
To begin with Lennart, I tried cropping the coloured version on the right side as you have done, and there is a very marked improvement, thank you. Why not in black and white indeed, I like your rendering .. Frank, I see what you mean about the glass ..
I love the model, light, and the pose which very natural.
If she had ben resting on the other elbow and turned towards the right, the glass would have had a dark background to make it pop, since that is what whe is looking at. Awesome body of work, John!
I like it , Very natural . Lovely colors and light
That's an interesting comment, thank you for the trouble taken. I'm with you all the way, other possibly than in soft focusing the background. I do get your point, and it might make an interesting portrait, but my thinking at the time was closer to capturing my model in those few moments of respite during which I had filled her glass and she was talking .. without the detail in the background, which remains I repeat rather clumsy, I would lose the sense of presence necessary to this "backstage" style photo ..
Jatinder S. Keith
Cropping Further If this photograph catches the eye, despite a cluttered background, it is due to the lighting, the skin tones and the relaxed posture and expression of a beautiful lady. Lennart's good suggestion to crop out part of the clutter, accentuates the image. I wonder why the camera was not looking at her with a shallow DOF. Personal taste; I would further crop out at the top, about halfway down to her head and at bottom to a little below the reflection of her hand. I would also clone out the objects in the background or blur them, but let the color be there. The picture would then become a diagonal composition with her glaze gliding down the diagonal formed by her arm, onto the glass. It would bind my eye a little longer.
Thank you. One reason why I post my work, alike many of us, is to see what impression it evokes in others (I also use PN as a catalogue, hence the older work that remains there). Sometimes, the response can be very different to what we see ourselves. Likewise, the attention given to certain perceived faults will also vary. Occasionally, I do see what is wrong but I choose not to change it. However, is it a willful effort to retain authenticity, or is it simply laziness, I don't know? It is difficult to question one's own motives, though one must assume that one knows them better than anyone else. In this respect, it is interesting how sometimes a critic will claim to know better than the author, which does seem to be a rather presumptious thought. Whatever way you look at it though, I think that you are right in saying that it's the photographer's baby .. but that has not stopped me from better analyzing my own views after a critique, and making changes as a result. Some of the greatest photographers have claimed to be snapshooters and they have created memorable photos that have stood the test of time. Is that a right that one acquires only when one is famous? again I do not know. I have an easy going style, which sometimes reflects on the attitude of my models. Some people appear to notice that and may even like it. Maybe if I start to formalize my photogaphy more and take more care, it will disappear. People also claim sometimes to want you to get better, but better in comparison to what or to whom? I knew a primitive painter once in the mediterranean who did exquisite work, he was a fisherman on weekdays. On the encouragement of others, he went to art school. His work became a bore. The very qualities that first attracted one to him disappeared. Ultimately, I think then that it is up to others to say if they like the result or not, and possibly say why .. but without judging what was aimed at for, as I say above, even the author sometimes doesn't know. Forgive me if I have wandered somewhat from the subject, but your comment set me thinking about the matter in more general terms. Many thanks for passing by ..
Jatinder S. Keith
Dressing your baby You have posted two simultaneous photos of this model. In this one the image of the model, by itself, looks more elegant and aesthetic. Yet the other one receives higher rating on aesthetics. There it is the background that accentuates her image, give her a presence and bring out the mood. And it is the background that reduces the impact here. I am not able to appreciate the need to give her a 'presence' here. Anyway, this photograph is your baby. It is you to decide how you want to dress it up.
Thank you Faisal, I was just thinking out aloud actually. Sometimes people ask questions that incite one to do that, but maybe an artist should not do it too much and just be encouraged to express himself as he feels .. as you imply.
Keith, thank you for this interesting discussion. There are undoubtedly a lot of failings in my images, due in part to incompetence and other times to laziness. If only "Kings were philosophers and philosophers were Kings" .. I agree, however on still other occasions it may be willful. For example, I think that had I moved the wine glass or her head away from the obstacle behind her in this case, I would have lost the moment .. she was talking when I snapped the shot. And so it goes with many of my photos ... Already, people have sometimes said you must learn or improve, and of course I get the point, but if they presumably continue to review the work, they may already see something in it they like that I feel may disappear if I do, on the presumption of course that I could, which I doubt very much is so anyway! That does not stop me from not understanding people's frustration like your own, and the points you raise, for which I thank you once again. Another frequent comment is .. ahh, of course it's "nudes". However, that is rather nonsensical. My second most popular portfolio by only a narrow margin (not long ago it was first) which is high up in the charts is PORTAITS ( look at: ALL/All time/Folder views) , with substantially less images in it than others on PN with nudes, including mine. There is no nudity and only rarely glamour in the file on PORTRAITS, and the subjects vary between 6 and 60 years old. I only mention this so as to underline the point again that the snapshot approach to the work might sollicit an interest that it would not otherwise. One can also argue in favour of the fisherman's approach.
Jatinder S. Keith
Wandering with you My words 'Personal Taste' do not allow the categorisation of 'Critic' or in a better know than the artist. You can at best call these words as that of an admirer who at the end of show chants 'more... more... and still better'. Better in comparison to whom? Well the artist himself of course. We know that one distinct difference between a painting and a photograph is that everything that is presented is not in the control of the photographer, except perhaps in still photography. I understand this style of photography because 40 years back I used to do with my camera, around kids what John does around beautiful young ladies. (When I can get over my lethargy, I shall scan my negatives and put my hobby work on PN). This style may be easy going but not easy. Such work just cannot be formalised. I agree it will be at the cost of the spontaneity. However when a photograph is seen, it has two aspects. One is the photographer's labour. How he looked at and handled his subject, his equipment and his skills with it, being at the right place and clicking the right moment. Other is the photograph on it own, irrespective of who took it, under what conditions, with what intentions and how. A comment such as 'two clouds in a beautiful scene spoil the balance of the photograph' is not a comment on the photographer. It is partly viewer's subjectivity and partly a reference to an acknowledged technicality that add to the aesthetics. A technically poor quality photograph recording an exceptional and representative moment in a dangerous war zone, may win great admiration for the photographer. The photograph may become an immortal document, but may not be a good piece of art. The photographer's job does not end at capturing a good image. He is to present it to give a better treat to the eye. He is to possibly give an appropriate meaning and lead the viewers to it, provoking their emotions and thoughts. My above thoughts, provoked by your discussion, are about photography in general. Coming to this specific photograph, the following link shows what I mean. I have done nothing to your work except 'cover' some part that my subjectivity prefers not to see while relishing the main subject. It would wish to dodge or de-saturate the distractions. Will it affect the authenticity of the photo? In any case the question is what the viewers prefer; aesthetics or authenticity? Thanks for addressing my view so elaborately.
A young visitor from Taiwan ... A little busy in my opinion, especially behind the head, but some of her charm may be visible here ..