gary_mayo1

I zoomed in on the tattoo.  If it were a good tattoo, it should be PP ed out. 

The tummy, is a bit relaxed on a posed model.  I like the background, face and hair.

John: You Are Truly The Most Gifted Photographer I have Ever Had The Privlage To Admire The Work Of.

Stellar!

Very Eyes Wide Shut

Super Nice!  I would crop this at the flooring and show no under structure or shadow.

Your photograph is not level with the buildings and structures  in the background, very distracting.  The pose is good, and the blacks all look good on the blond model.  My personal opinion is heavy bokeh looks better on trees and plants, and not as good on structures.

People do not come to photo.net to see porn

Compliments

More tree, less woman.  Back away from the shot.  Using the rule of thirds.  That will leave everyone asking for more.  lol

Painful Crop.  Bring the elbow back.

Crop on top / side too close.  Also the prop is the perfect way to cover that tattoo, and most critical thoughts expressed or not, will be against that skin mark. In the modeling world, it is still best to cover tattoos.  I feel qualified to say this as a photographer for 30 years, and a tattoo artist for 11.  Her choice of placement is a perfect one as the art can be shown or hidden at will.

This would pass as a Mardi Gras snap shot at best.  Seeing the model in other photographs, this does not portray her in a good light.  You would do your portfolio (and hers) a favor by pulling it.    My eye finds no admirable qualities about this photograph.

Her pose leaves her with no neck and narrow shoulders.

Piercings, in this case, help make the shot.

Lighting and pose is has an eternal look about them, and the facial expression in not innocent, but awakened.  Awakened meets eternal, and that gives an interesting capture.

The caption could read "What Have You Done My Child!"

Very Nice!

Not tubed, hosed.

That is not an attractive pose for that model, John.

While she does have many strong poses she can do, many poses other models cannot do, this is not one of them.

This calls out for pencil tight jeans and something to cover or alter the curve of her back.

Same pose with her butt on the floor and her back against a wall and her feet on another wall would be a better pose using this shape, turned 90 degrees counter clockwise. say in a hallway.  That would give a straighter look to her back.  

To the posters that applaud the model in one way or another, I am afraid some of  you do not understand what this web site is about.  John is a master in what he does, and while John's choice of models contributes to the success of his work, his models are not Danish at a bakery contest.

Looks like a good capture of pre-natural selection

Yes!

John, I have followed your work for years, with an occasional comment.

In reading your images, one day it dawned upon me one secret to your success in photographing top rated models.  I will not give your secret away, but it is present in full view in several photographs.   A hint would be, Like Begets Like.

The reason for photo.net success is contributing photographers like yourself that are as good as any talent out there. 

I would prefer this as a full body shot.  Do you have a full crop you could show us?

I know you use pretty simple lighting, so maybe go into some detail of how you captured this pose.

It is interesting how she is looking into what appears to be the darkest place in her environment.

Her arms between elbow and shoulder have lost detail, but still an interesting use of the model.  She looks almost butterfly like with her wings spread in the sun.

If this were a ball game, you knocked it out of the park, basses loaded!

Such a heavy contrast between strict discipline and zero discipline makes for an interesting image.

The body art does nothing for the composition of the photography.  Could have used one arm to cover the T.S.

Not a fan of the shadows on the back wall.

I am offended by a frightened nude woman in a dungeon.  It does not matter how well an image is done if the image is wrong.

This image is wrong.