Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Pre-Raphaelite Scene  (Read 3887 times)
alangubbay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115


« on: December 19, 2009, 04:02:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Enacted at a garden party last summer!
Logged
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2009, 08:07:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: alangubbay
Enacted at a garden party last summer!
I think that the obvious over-use of fill flash detracts from what I would liked to have depicted as more natural and mystical.

I have nothing against artistic full-frontal nudes... generally artists try to leave something to the imagination ... but I think that with softer fill and less fill it might have been a very much more pleasing picture.
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2693


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2009, 12:14:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I thought the Pre-Raph admission card was wispy fabric tastefully semi-drapped over a coyly nude sweetly feminine figure?  But I'm easy.

The metaphor seems a little confused here.  And what's with the foot-in-the-face thing?  But overall must have been a great party, and whatever the genre the girls look terrific even if somewhat unclear about their mission.  Please do not hesitate to submit further examples for thoughtful review.  
Logged
alangubbay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115


« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2009, 03:29:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dick Roadnight
I think that the obvious over-use of fill flash detracts from what I would liked to have depicted as more natural and mystical.

I have nothing against artistic full-frontal nudes... generally artists try to leave something to the imagination ... but I think that with softer fill and less fill it might have been a very much more pleasing picture.

I am surprised that you feel that the picture indicates that flash was used.  It was not. It was a sunny afternoon and the figures were in the shade.  A great deal of post-exposure work was done and perhaps you feel that the figures now stand out too far from the background and need to be darker in tone.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2009, 03:31:01 PM by alangubbay » Logged
alangubbay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115


« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2009, 03:33:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bill t.
I thought the Pre-Raph admission card was wispy fabric tastefully semi-drapped over a coyly nude sweetly feminine figure?  But I'm easy.

The metaphor seems a little confused here.  And what's with the foot-in-the-face thing?  But overall must have been a great party, and whatever the genre the girls look terrific even if somewhat unclear about their mission.  Please do not hesitate to submit further examples for thoughtful review.  

Perhaps the title does not fit after all.  I shall have to think of a better one!
Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1662


« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2009, 10:37:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: alangubbay
I am surprised that you feel that the picture indicates that flash was used.  It was not.

Something is definitely artificially lighting the figures from camera left.  There are hard-edged shadows on their legs.


Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5508



WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2009, 10:13:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bill t.
... And what's with the foot-in-the-face thing?...
I knew I've seen that exact same "foot-in-the..." pose before:  

[attachment=18835:image032.jpg]
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Shirley Bracken
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2009, 06:12:45 AM »
ReplyReply

I can see you worked hard post camera.  I think it is a bit harsh.  No mystery there. There is nothing soft about these girls.  It seems rather about the T and A.  They look very modern.  A little softness and contemplation in their body language would be nice.  I always like to see a little innocence and modesty.   But maybe the skin is what you are interested in.  I'll bet you enjoyed the experience of it though.  IMHO  

I only wish I had the skills you have.  I look at it from an arty view, not a technical view.  That's where I have the most experience.
Logged

ssbracken.com  (Formerly Bumperjack)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2009, 03:13:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Shirley Bracken
I can see you worked hard post camera.  I think it is a bit harsh.  No mystery there. There is nothing soft about these girls.  It seems rather about the T and A.  They look very modern.  A little softness and contemplation in their body language would be nice.  I always like to see a little innocence and modesty.   But maybe the skin is what you are interested in.  I'll bet you enjoyed the experience of it though.  IMHO  



Not really about T´n´A because there ain't much of it there.

Softness and contemplation. You don't get that quite so easily.

Innocence and modesty. To project that for photography demands skills that I doubt the girls have; I don't think they are models but could be entirely wrong, of course.

Enjoyable experience? Don't know about the photographer, but no great vibe saying just that comes off the shot to me.

This kind of photography is anything other than easy to do well and it takes both photographer and models to know what they are doing to pull it off with panache. Nude, of itself, doesn't great nudes make, and neither does terribly contrived posturing. It seems to me that those who do do it very well can hardly ever not do it well; there is just something that some have and others spend their lives searching to find.

In the end, it's really part of what makes photography such a tease, such a two-pronged fight between self and techniques!

Rob C

Logged

Shirley Bracken
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 23, 2009, 03:38:16 PM »
ReplyReply

What do you mean, there ain't none there.  I don't see much missing.  Size maybe.

 I know what you mean about working with models.  You just can't make them do exactly what your vision is.  I ask about the skin, not to insult you, but rather, because it's all about the skin to me.  I also paint, and I love to paint skin!  

I don't think I'd have to balls to ask girls to pose like that... oh yeah, I don't have any balls.    

Is that the only one that you have?  I'd like to see more.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2009, 03:39:34 PM by Shirley Bracken » Logged

ssbracken.com  (Formerly Bumperjack)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #10 on: December 24, 2009, 03:36:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Shirley Bracken
What do you mean, there ain't none there.  I don't see much missing.  Size maybe.

 I know what you mean about working with models.  You just can't make them do exactly what your vision is.  I ask about the skin, not to insult you, but rather, because it's all about the skin to me.  I also paint, and I love to paint skin!  

I don't think I'd have to balls to ask girls to pose like that... oh yeah, I don't have any balls.    

Is that the only one that you have?  I'd like to see more.





Shirley, I'm not the photographer.

T'n'A has a connotation quite separate from just showing, well, tit 'n' ass, which of itself is neither really here nor there.

Don't worry about your lack of appendages - they just get you into trouble most of the time and then sometimes have the nerve to go on right ahead and kill you.

Merry Christmas.

Rob C
« Last Edit: December 24, 2009, 03:37:59 AM by Rob C » Logged

alangubbay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115


« Reply #11 on: December 24, 2009, 10:35:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Needless to say, I am grateful for all your interest and comments.  I cannot really see the harsh shadows on the legs and all the light was natural daylight.  The upper girl is a top fashion model with very little in the way of Ts, so these have been enhanced a tad!  The other girl would not remove her black shoes so that had to be done in photoshop.  Moreover, as she is a schoolteacher her head had to be changed.  Both heads now come from the same upper girl with some modification.  These were the main changes apart from removal of a garden shed and work on the background.  Have a look at my figure study further down the list.  Perhaps this is more subtle?
Logged
Shirley Bracken
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 24, 2009, 10:40:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Wow Alan, super!  They are gorgeous women.  And the skill in the photography is awesome.
Logged

ssbracken.com  (Formerly Bumperjack)
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1662


« Reply #13 on: December 25, 2009, 11:56:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: alangubbay
I cannot really see the harsh shadows on the legs and all the light was natural daylight.

Nobody said anything about "harsh".  I said "hard-edged"; which is not necessarily a bad thing.  Hard light is far more difficult to manage than soft light, yet can be very attractive.  View black and white movies from the 30s and 40s to see hard light used to great artistic effect.

The upper figure's inside left thigh has a shadow that does not appear to be a shadow from the direct sunlight that dapples her shin.  It looks like a shadow from a flash at a distance or the shiny side of a reflector.  The source angle for the direct sunlight on her left shin and torso does not match the thigh shadow.  Hence the conclusion that some "artificial" lighting was done, whether by flash or reflector.  In other words, there are two sources lighting this image.  This same source appears to be lighting the lower figure, as her right leg casts a similar shadow on her left leg.  Also, the tree trunk appears to cast a non-sunlight shadow on the ground.

The lower figure's (composited) head is too small for the body size.

The tree branches in the upper right compete with the figures in detail and especially in brightness - more so at the edges of the frame.  This is seldom good.

The sunlight patch above the lower figure's left breast is unflattering.

The bottom 10% of the image seems unnaturally bright.  I would darken it at least a stop.




This image represents both a challenging subject and a relatively difficult location.  It took substantial courage for all involved to attempt this shoot.  

"Day exterior is the hardest":  
Hollywood Director of Photography Michael Chapman.

Logged
alangubbay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115


« Reply #14 on: December 26, 2009, 01:13:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you Shirley for your praise and thank you Peter for your detailed and helpful criticism, which I have taken on board and consequently have been able to improve the picture.
Logged
Shirley Bracken
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


WWW
« Reply #15 on: December 26, 2009, 01:31:14 PM »
ReplyReply

You are welcome.  I have been reading along and looking at the work here and I have come to the conclusion that I am way out of my element.  I have no asperations to do big professional commissioned shoots.  I am more an arty shooter.  I will continue to read in some of the threads that are not over my head and ask questions in the beginner thread.  I do enjoy watching what you all do.  Keep shooting, I'll just be watching.
Logged

ssbracken.com  (Formerly Bumperjack)
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7789



WWW
« Reply #16 on: December 26, 2009, 04:04:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Shirley Bracken
You are welcome.  I have been reading along and looking at the work here and I have come to the conclusion that I am way out of my element.  I have no asperations to do big professional commissioned shoots.  I am more an arty shooter.  I will continue to read in some of the threads that are not over my head and ask questions in the beginner thread.  I do enjoy watching what you all do.  Keep shooting, I'll just be watching.
Shirley,

I think a lot of us here are "arty shooters", or at least we just photograph what interests us and if others like our stuff, then that's a bonus. I read the "pro" forums as well, and admire much of their work. But I also very much appreciate the fact that I don't have to sell my photos to survive. So I suggest you keep on reading any threads that interest you, whether they seem "over your head" or not.


Eric

Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Shirley Bracken
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 27, 2009, 10:34:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Eric.  I won't disappear completely.  I'm just soaking it all in.  I am starting over again since I lost my files.  But it is rather refreshing to know more now and approach my shots differently.  Like a fresh start on a new level.  Lots to think about but that keeps us pumpin'.  

Alan, are we going to see more from that shooting?  It was interesting knowing the changes you made.  Just knowing what is possible keeps me at it.
Logged

ssbracken.com  (Formerly Bumperjack)
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1662


« Reply #18 on: December 27, 2009, 03:01:31 PM »
ReplyReply

You're welcome, Alan.  Thanks for not taking the criticisms personally.  
We'd all love to see what you do to improve this challenging image.
Logged
alangubbay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115


« Reply #19 on: December 29, 2009, 03:30:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Peter McLennan
You're welcome, Alan.  Thanks for not taking the criticisms personally.  
We'd all love to see what you do to improve this challenging image.

OK Peter.  Here is the original file after global correction in Camera Raw followed by the last version.  I have taken most of what you suggested into account but I have left the shadows which do not trouble me. So far as the other criticism about the lack of mystical aspect goes, unfortunately this is currently beyond my ability.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad