dougityb 0 Posted August 31, 2008 The original had a warm tint, from afternoon light, but I correctedit. And I'm not sure about her hands, if they're placed ok relative toher body. Is the background too distracting, or does it even begin tomake any sense? We shot here a few days prior, but came back with whatwe thought were better clothes. Link to comment
shirkwolfe 0 Posted August 31, 2008 I kind of like the hand that way. It seems like she's a little nervous getting her picture taken, but her expression says otherwise. The background doesn't distract because it's white like the dress. The lighting and skin tones are wonderful. Link to comment
MichaelChang 12 Posted August 31, 2008 Everything is fine - very fine, Doug. Love the light; I gather the wall shadow offers some clues. Link to comment
dougityb 0 Posted August 31, 2008 I rescrinted it, removing the chipped paint that was identified as distracting by a post that has since been removed. I obviously can't do anything to her hand right now, and I like the feeling that Susan identified, but I agree with Michael that it's not quite ideal, so I tried to darken the vignette in that area. Link to comment
dougityb 0 Posted August 31, 2008 I guess it will take a few hours to refresh, maybe even overnight. I also reduced the contrast of the background. Link to comment
mg 0 Posted August 31, 2008 This, I think, is really VERY good. Only very minor quibble: the lower hand - but honestly it doesn't matter, that's life too... great skin tones this time ! Great expression too ! Great perspectives and light. Truly a step above the other portraits of her or Jenna that you uploaded recently... Well... Except for the fact that I just saw another great one of Nora...:-) Link to comment
chipgarber 0 Posted August 31, 2008 The right hand does look like she is flashing some secret sign. I especially like the inclusion of the adjacent walkway. It suggests a path that she is contemplating, and, at the moment, hiding from. Regards, Mark Link to comment
dougityb 0 Posted August 31, 2008 On a scale of 1-10, where 1 is "not at all," and 10 is "ruins the shot" it's sounding like the hand is a 2, or 3 in terms of objection. I can live with that. Link to comment
hus 0 Posted August 31, 2008 I believe this is a proper portrait. I like the soft light and dof. I think the hads are alright. Link to comment
jeff.grant 0 Posted August 31, 2008 That sums up the hand correctly. The hand is incongruent but far from a show stopper. BTW, I deleted the other comment because I reread it and then remembered how blunt an instrument of communication we are using. I didn't want to be misconstrued. Link to comment
steve_lowther 0 Posted August 31, 2008 Strictly speaking, in classical posing terms, her left hand could be lowered so her wrist retroflexes just a bit forming the all-feminine "C" curve. Her right hand could be criticized for forming a "claw", but honestly the spontaneity and innocence of the right hand pose is difficult to criticize. I might have tried, in addition to the pose above, having her back leaning against the wall where her hand is placed and facing towards the columns. You might find more visual continuity this way. Doug, if you don't find my comment helpful here, just let me know and I will be glad to delete it. Steve Lowther Link to comment
jkilgo 0 Posted September 1, 2008 Beautiful portrait..I really like the soft natural lighting...great job exposing the white dress...great choice for this shot. Beautiful model and nice backdrop...Nicely captured. Link to comment
dougityb 0 Posted September 1, 2008 I see my revision has finally posted. Thanks for the attention you've all paid to this photo. I had no problems with your comment at all, Jeff, and I'm glad I saw it before you took it down, or those chips would still be visible. I took it as coming from a colleague with good intentions, not an enemy. Steve. the same with you: there are valuable insights in your remarks. The C curve in the wrist, for one thing, is something Nora and I have talked about, either since this session, or the first one. Many frames were rejected because of locked elbows, or locked wrists. Nora is very tall, 5'11', so her long and slender arms tend to be rather conspicuous, in my opinion, if they aren't articulated properly. Also, the pose suggested is a good one, and Nora hit it a couple times, but all things considered led me to choose this one above, and a couple others I'm still working on, both of which might be better. Link to comment
jeff.grant 0 Posted September 1, 2008 That looks a lot better, Doug, and that is exactly how I mean any comment that I make. Link to comment
mg 0 Posted September 2, 2008 "her long and slender arms tend to be rather conspicuous, in my opinion, if they aren't articulated properly". Justa thought: how about accepting it and using it to your advantage... I think she's perhaps a bit young and tender for that, but there are some very nice DISARTICULATED fashion poses... Good to see that according to everyone here, the hand isn't a show stopper at all. I also feel you selected the right ones on the contact sheet - green ones look good too... Link to comment
wini 0 Posted September 9, 2008 very nice model, i like her expression ... she has a very deep look - beautiful photo Link to comment
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now