michael comerford

I like this a lot - good strong contrast, strength apparent in the model, a truly striking image.Beautifully executed. Well done!

MC.

I love so many elements of this photo, but in being honest I feel I should suggest:

- Running a gentle blur over the green seat cover would remove it from visual notice. I find the creases and lines a little distracting.

- I'd have liked to see her left forearm and/or hand - at the moment it's kind of lost behind her, and feels ... missing

otherwise I think this is a great image. Well Done !!

MC.

I like the concept, but if you didn't have the clear dividing line between the frames it would be a better, and more acceptable, image.

MC.

Beautifully composed. A well balanced exposure - long enough to get the reflection in the water, short enough not to blow out the highlights.Exceptional

MC.

I'm not sure that the definition of porn has much to do with someone being aroused - watching a heterosexual couple would not be arousing to a homosexual, but it still might be classed as Porn !

I'm sorry, but even though I am very liberal myself and have no issues at all with nude imagery, I think this one might be crossing the line for this particular forum.

While the processing is interesting, and has certainly detracted from the truth of the image, we still see a woman, her partner grabbing her hips, and his pelvis buried into her buttocks. If it isn't real sex it's certainly simulated, and that puts it out of contention for this particular forum.

Technically while I don't mind the effect, I would have preferred it to be evenly spaced across the image. The thinner strip off to the right draws your attention to her partner. Similarly the thinner strip along the bottom is also distracting.

I like where you're going with this effect, and I'd be interested to know how you achieved it. Keep posting, keep improving. Congratulations on a thought provoking post !

MC.

Thanks to those who have privately messaged me regarding the title - for the record it is NOT a spelling mistake, it's a play on words (and also mildly punny). Look at the subject matter in the photo and you'll understand.

MC.

I don't really think so, unless you think that the colours are too washed out from what the subject actually looks like.

If you shot this RAW you should have no issues playing with the levels a bit to reduce some of the almost-hot spots, otherwise simply bump the sats up a little and see how that goes.

I like the shot, the background could do with a little burning in to increase impact on the subject.

What on earth (or under the water) is it ?

MC.

I'm a little put off by the bright foot in such a dark and oily image, and coupled with the oversized watermarking I felt that the image was not as good as it could have been.

I'd suggest dropping the exposure on the foot, minimise the watermark, and this would be a much more aesthetic image to look at.

MC.

What a wonderful image, and so carefully crafted. The attention to detail is obvious, the harmony between subject and photographer utterly apparent.

Marvellous.

MC.