hwilde

I love this photo. On second thought, I love this whole folder. The exposure is great. A couple of things I noticed in the picture is the word steam on the ground and what looks a spoon in the crosswalk. Did you intend for those to be included? It's all good. Regards...

I see a lot of defending of this photo from invisible offenders. Who called it porn, anyway? Although I don't believe it's porn, I must say I'm having a really tough time commenting on this from work (I'm the only woman in an office of about 16 men). Well, I guess you could say it does reduce woman to an object, as she is without a face and/or personality. But, this isn't a study of a woman, is it? It's a study of a woman's body part, and a good job of that. Anyway, I would like to point out to those folks who keep calling it "natural," etc. Unless this is a girl of around 12, I think it would be more "natural" if there was hair, no?

Thank you for the comment. These are just negs on a crappy scanner, but I'll adjust the contrast in PS and bit more and see if it's an improvement.

I love this series (although I want to see more, please). This picture is especially interesting to me. It looks like it could have been taken 100 years ago. Really great subjects.

Ha! Great photo.

Your whole folder here is just amazing.

If I could figure out how to give this a rating, it would be 7/7. Beautiful, just perfect.

The depth and texture are amazing.

and...

Mark -- I don't know if this is typical, except maybe for low light. I have a couple other photos posted that were taken using Fuji Sensia 400 (Coctail and the Preview Booths). They have completely different lighting and results.

I have no problem with the lack of sharpness. I think it would just look like an ad photo if it were sharper. Actually, I might like to see it with less depth of field. I also like how dark it is. Very nice.