|
Adrienne_83 wrote: She was what he was working WITH, I gave my opinion. Sep 17 05 11:51 am Link All due respect Nerlande, but just like art, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.. The comment, You're Ugly is just rude, adds nothing to the thread and quite honestly, pompous.. Beauty comes in many forms; one form is attitude.. From your crude statement, I'd say you're ugly.. The girl is 15 and who knows, after Mother Nature is done with her, she may be the hottest woman alive... Yes, this is a cruel biz, but it still should be kept professional and in context of the question asked.. Sep 17 05 12:09 pm Link Nerlande wrote: What's up with that? Sep 17 05 12:16 pm Link Nerlande wrote: That's the kind of shallow cattiness you find at clubs when you're drunk and think some girl is hitting on your man or the man you think is yours. Sep 17 05 12:19 pm Link Nerlande wrote: So is this comment, thanks for showing who you are in a public forum. Duly noted Sep 17 05 12:22 pm Link Nerlande wrote: Please note the credibility of your statement goes to your level of education. The period is always placed inside the quote. Sep 17 05 12:34 pm Link Nerlande wrote: There is NO call for this sort of thing. She's 15 years old and the subject of a portrait series. She is NOT presented as a model. Did you even stop to consider the possibility that these were pictures of a client and not a "model"? Sep 17 05 01:59 pm Link The images definitely drown in brown, which does makes her disappear and doesn't bring out any of her features. Her face seems a little underlit. And perhaps some different make-up would have added some life to the images and her. If she's that young her vitality and youth doesn't really come across. Sep 17 05 02:38 pm Link I'd say, knowing that you're doing this as a portrait series not anything commercial etc, that the bottom one works the best though I don't think it's great. The first and second, make me cringe because to me I see awkward all over. The poses seem just like that, poses and contrived. I'm not saying that's how she felt when she was working with you, that's just what comes across to me. Last shot I think would have worked better with switch up in color scheme and lighting. I agree with some of the other posters that it all seems so brown to me. Sep 17 05 02:46 pm Link I think the model/subject has unique facial features, so it is very important to recognize this and apply different lighting techniques than you would use on other subjects. I think shot #2 works best on this girl because some of the unflattering shadows are softened. I would have also bumped up the light on the background to give the shots more depth. By the way, hats off to you and everyone else who is willing to take a few kicks in the sack in order to better themselves. Sep 17 05 02:54 pm Link Nerlande wrote: What an ass comment to make. Sep 17 05 03:01 pm Link William Kious wrote: First, I don't think she's even remotely close to being "ugly." Sep 17 05 03:02 pm Link Paul Ferrara wrote: That explains a lot in that statement. Portraits, as in Paul's Portraits is what you do. Try as you might, that doesn't necessarily translate to modeling photography as there are far more components involved than just traditional portrait lighting requirement. This seems to be a difficult concept to grasp, thus not getting the "portrait series" statement made by William. Sep 17 05 06:25 pm Link Paul Ferrara wrote: Brian Diaz wrote: Really? I didn't think so. What do you think of the points I made? Do you not think you gave her a double chin? Do you not think that her eyes are dark? And what do you think of the floating oval? Sep 17 05 06:31 pm Link Paul Ferrara wrote: I completely agree, and I think that someone owes an apology. Paul wrote: I think that's the problem. Each face has its own lighting requirements, and you lit her as though she were a fashion model. That's a big mistake. Sep 17 05 06:36 pm Link Brian Diaz wrote: I do not think I gave her a double-chin. There's a fairly strong shadow under her chin, maybe that's what you're seeing. Her eyes aren't dark except for the third one which has some hair over it. But the top of the socket is dark. Good catch. Just for kicks I'll see if I can lighten it up a bit. Sep 17 05 06:47 pm Link Paul Ferrara wrote: Granted I don't shoot fashion or even commercial, but even I don't shoot every other model the same. I guess it depends on what you're trying to accomplish. I assumed, based on the look of the shots, that you were attempting "portraits." But it turns out you weren't. Sep 17 05 07:50 pm Link As Brian said: "Your shadows are far too deep for her face, and they accentuate her flaws. Look at the double chins you've given her. Her eyes are in shadow, and her nostrils are so dark, they draw a lot of attention." & I agree. Flatter & softer light would have been better - or maybe not. A monitor should have deleted the objectional remark, but that is NOT of your doing., & is not directed to you. Sep 17 05 08:24 pm Link KM von Seidl wrote: That's for sure! KM von Seidl wrote: I don't shoot every model the same. In this case I used just one light, no fill. It didn't work very well as Brian and others were kind enough to point out. Sep 17 05 08:47 pm Link What I posted was the first thing that came to mind when I viewed Ferrara's shots of Ashley. I expected to get chastised for my insensitive remark. Clearly, I didn't care. Still don't. Sep 17 05 09:39 pm Link Paul Ferrara wrote: KM von Seidl wrote: That's for sure! Yeah, I have no problem admitting neither my skill level nor style are cut out for either one. KM von Seidl wrote: I don't shoot every model the same. In this case I used just one light, no fill. It didn't work very well as Brian and others were kind enough to point out. You keep talking light technique. I'm talking intent. Before the lights are lit. You said: Paul Ferrara wrote: I don't understand what that means. How can you shoot without knowing what outcome you're looking for than to know that it's a live female human in front of you and you want to capture her image? Sep 17 05 09:43 pm Link I like the second photo best. And I like the strong shadows. A soft spot backlight perhaps with an amber gel low on the background would enable separation and still preserve the modeling. Her hair doesn't like being straight. It would be more comfortable gay. Rob Sep 17 05 10:12 pm Link RCphotos wrote: ***Heheh Sep 17 05 10:17 pm Link I think that you did as good of job as possible dealing with a model who did not happen to be photogenic...the lighting and composition and all other "photography" aspects of the photo are fine. I think it is great that you decided to have her show off her braces...she is fifteen and the braces are a part of her...she is definatly not "ugly" (just an awkward teenager) However, Im betting that Paul did make her look prettier in these pics than she looked in real life...they will probobly be portraits that she keeps throughout her life, even looks back on and laughs at when she is older and has perfect teeth. That being said, I think that the person who was ignorant enough to make the "ugly" comment about a fifteen year old, should relize that there are many, many different types of beauty....One of the main types is the beauty that comes from within, the kind that gives you enough courage to show off your braces....A loss of inner beatuy makes your outer beauty EXTEREMLY unattractive. Sep 18 05 01:39 am Link KM von Seidl wrote: Wow, after I just read through this thread I realized I pretty much quoted you ...sorry, great minds think alike Sep 18 05 01:49 am Link Nerlande wrote: I bet your going to go really far with that attitude. Sep 18 05 01:53 am Link Nerlande wrote: Dang...I don't normally call people a bitch...but that's exactly what you are. Beauty fades darling. Ugly is forever and that's what you'll be someday. Some stuck up snotty bitter old lady. Sep 18 05 02:23 am Link DigitalCMH wrote: nicely said. Sep 18 05 02:25 am Link Nerlande wrote: Sometimes it's best to keep your asinine thoughts to yourself. DigitalCMH wrote: Perfect. Sep 18 05 02:32 am Link Nerlande wrote: Wow. Sep 18 05 07:05 am Link Just ignore Nerlande....she's having a DIVA moment y'all. Nerlande, if you can't contribute positively to this forum, just don't be here. Not all of us can be as hot as you, we can only hope that one day...... As for the 15 year old, I like the shots. THey are really good portraits. Maybe some touch up on the face to get rid of the circles (not dark, but sunken look) under the eys, and it's fine to me. Sep 18 05 08:40 am Link I like what Monte says about his five (or so) portrait lighting setups: "Which light would you take away?" In order of reduction: background? accent? hair? fill? or main? If film or sensors (and small prints and monitors) offered a more evenly distributed tonal range -- i.e., an experience more akin to eyesight -- the need to fill creases and shadows would be less pressing. Sep 18 05 09:48 am Link commart wrote: Since I only had one light, mine would have been pretty dark. Sep 18 05 12:22 pm Link Paul Ferrara wrote: That may be the problem: "shot her just as I would have any other model". Sep 18 05 01:52 pm Link |
