critter

Any thoughts appreciated... From an 8mm live show. To hear their music visit http://

www.8mmaudio.com/site.html

thanks. I had to burn down the backgound in the mirror to get the effect. And the parting of the curtain is exactly the point of an interior glimpse into a mirror. We were strangers that day. Had I my druthers, I'd reshoot it with a more complex expression.

Thank you. To be exact, f1.8. I love the 50mm. 99 bucks and the best investment I ever made because it forces me to move and interact. And I adore the focused intent of shallow DOF. The limitation of it forces me to wake up and get involved.

Any thoughts appreciated

Any thoughts appreciated.

I'm a bit confused by the glare comments. The only way to show shape When shooting reflective black is via distorted highlights. That's what gives high contrast shiny a sense of shape. While I can see a case being made for the right highlight being random, the left seems necessary. And thanks for the comments.

Aw, thanks *blush*

Just to update - this shot got published in Secret Magazine's "Fetish Anthology 4" along with another. I'm quite honored, as there are some great photographers in it.

Any thoughts appreciated...

any thoughts appreciated...

Any thoughts appreciated...

Any thoughts appreciated...

Bah..Jeff is a curmudgeon who enjoys taking potshots at easy targets. Which may explain his solitary contribution of an ironic one hour parking. But this site is hardly in the toilet.

 

And far be it from me to discourage the fairer sex from indulging their urge towards revealing.

 

(and Jeff... ARE YOU INSANE?!?! Go back to picking on proud parents and leave the naked women alone...spoilsport)

Congratulations or apologies are in order.

 

Regardless, I love the haunt of this image. The ghostly white light and the

active billow. Something about the mimickry of ordinary draping and the

significance of a human moment elevates this into a sublime observance.

 

Most atttempts at abstract symbolism fail because they are static. This

glimpse into frail life succeeds because it echoes that dynamic energy. I

agree with most about the wall verticals, but nonetheless, it's a mature insight

into human faith in promise and hope, with nary a person in site. Well done.

Thanks Knicki.

 

And F Y Y'all, I grew up with both the Sears and N.G. Toss in a Readers Digest (decidedly unsexy) and you get the gist of my youth.

 

Despite all the racy suburban "Yowza" of Sears, my palms never grew hair. (Oh, those verdent Sundays) NG was a desperate recourse, and as I later discovered with Playboy, the articles WERE actually compelling. I still buy NG. Playboy, not so much.

 

And if the Sears catalogue was worth it's rather hefty weight in free adolescent wanking, it's also quite handy in delivering 3 piece disfigurement.

 

I say, indulge freely.

Thanks Owen and Knicki...that's high praise...

F.Y. -

 

I don't consider it preachy or defensive. I do get rather pissed off when someone insults my model, in this case, by refering to her choices as a "waste of beauty". I post photo's for a critique of my photographic skills. I really see no point in Christopher telling me how sad it is that this model (my girlfriend, in this case) doesn't live up to his standard of beauty. Especially since he can't seem to distinguish between his subjective appreciation and a more objective notion.

 

Sorry, but Chris' aesthetic isn't mine and I find it obnoxious that he can't seperate his excitement and attraction and a that of another. Instead of pointing out his pecadillos, he turns it around and faults the model for being "an awful waste of beauty". Sorry, but that's just obnoxious. Tangential or not, It hardly merited that insult.

 

And it isn't all that tangential nor violating a mainstream notion. It's actually a fairly common marking. Oddly, what you find attractive, Chris found unfeminine. Confidence and purpose is what I see in the expression. He called it hard. But then, he has a specific notion of femininity. His picture isn't about her tende,r giggling side. It's about her aggresive side.

 

You know, the non tensed, wary or withdrawn part. That bit where the woman is human, not merely an idealized bit of feminine fluff. The bleeding, farting, greedy and intelligent beast that shatters you with soft skin and morning breath.

 

The smiling bright eyes are your notion of beauty. I tend to find the morning trundle towards the shower rather erotic in all its un"feminine" beauty.

 

And your notion of the savage and symptomatic trouble of a pierced and tattooed set is a bit behind the times. They aren't savages, they are cultures. And we who grew up with that National Geographic understanding usually personalize the marking.

 

I have a tiny tattoo and a nose ring. I decidely took a stance outside of a fad, but every marking on me had a meaning to me. Perhaps you need to examine your bias on primitive cultures. Not all are wallowing in a sense of their own self worthlessness. Traditionally, body markings and modifications have had mainly a spiritual component. Even those mindless primatives were aware of the dynamic.

 

It's somewhat akin to buying a crisp new suit, getting a short hair cut and testifying before the community in a Baptist church. It's arrogance to consider a lip ring any more wierd or indicative of personal disgust than being dunked by some guy wearing a polyester robe.

 

My Dad wore a suit and tie every day of his life. How is that not a ritual disfigurement? He loosened the tie when he got home, he took off the suit. I know alot of millionares that sport arm sleeves. My dad isn't a millionaire. If you think Eva is unattractive, you need to consult a shrink.

 

I'm sorry, but the attitude that marking one's body is indicatitive of weakness, self hate or inadequacy is so mired in a narrow cultural context, that I can't even begin to explain it. Are the pierced ears of the mall set indicative of self-hatred? And how, exactly are they different? And less self loathing?

 

Thanks for the compliment. This photo is about the beauty within. I find it odd that some dickhead who merely talks about externals and considers it insightful, is considered the norm versus a rude asshole. Have you noticed the tattoo and piercing shops springing up around you? Wasted beauty my ass.

Lol...you gotta love the peculiarities of a fetish...:)

I loved the layers of mirrors in the bathroom...

I actually like that the chair dominates the frame because it echos the implicit story. There's also an ironic subtext that I don't expect anyone to get. The glasses of the absent Domme are hers. In a sense the larger story is an interior one.

 

Here's a diffent angle... http://www.industrialdeathrock.com/gallery/pixzip/crittergm/EvaLuxMadonnainn/10628523374.jpg

Any thoughts welcomed. The kernal of this shoot was suggested by the

model. You can see more of her at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/

light_of_eva/

I won't even get into what an arrogant and small minded view you have of beauty, feminine charm and what makes for "pretty". Suffice it to say, her tattoo is a part of her personality and she IS a multidimensioned, vibrant and beautiful woman. A hard look is just another side of her embaressed blushing. I'm not sure what planet you're from, but here on earth, women have a wide litany of emotions and beauty can often be described as terrible.

 

As to your comments on the actual photo, yes, the fingers are a tad distracting. I could clone them out and I've been torn about it. Maybe I will. The shower bar adds a nice diagonal for me and provides context. This was from a series taken in a bathtub. A white sheet wouldn't have the same meaning.

 

Thanks for your thoughts.

Last night, it was decided, that the subtitle to the expression in this image was

"I can kick your ass, and look fabulous doing it" Seems appropos. Any

comments welcome...

Steve - to be precise, it was a glass shower door. I welcome comments because it eiher makes me see something so familiar in a different light, or helps me refine the instinctual impulse into a more wordy conceptual framework. I'm still figuring out the inent behind what appeals to me, and that only aids me in the moment before the shuter press.

It's interesing tha you mentioned Weegee. I suppose there is a stark documentarian nature to the rest of the shower series. I've always admired his harsh,, unflattering presentation, so perhaps some of that leaks out despite the softboxes. I like the shot you mentioned because it was emotive in an abstract way. I like the rest because they are an intrusive eye gazing. Interesting point... and thanks.

Actually, while I adore my step ladder as a compositional tool, in the shower series, the high angle was the only way I could get a full body shot in the cramped space with my 50mm. In general, I've noticed that women look better from a higher angle. I think this has to do with the way it stretches the skin, although I'm sure there's a psychological component of dominance mixed in.

 

What the hell were you doing staring at the tile grout? Kidding aside, good call. I'm used to metering with a black background. All that white threw me. And the background was burned down a bit to get such details.

 

I stopped at the hint of detail so I could suggest the background while drawing the eye, like the use of blur, towards the subject. At least, that was my logic.