sospix wrote:
That's easily fixed  .  .  .  ask Santa fer a ticket, THEN ya could be my AVI  .  .  . 

SOS

Can't be mine I am not that tall and can't afford to go to florida

Dragon Ink Photography wrote:
Love the image, and it could be something I shoot, but I wouldn't have picked this image because she's "missing" an arm.  Small nitpick, but that's why I wouldn't pick it. 

Edit: Can't be me I dont have those abs or a green bikini

_ Robyn Elizabeth _ wrote:
Also, while I think it's a great image it's a bit traditionally sexy glamour for my tastes, I generally like images that are a bit more unusual.

I think you'll find it's a lingerie shot, it's not at all Glamour, there so much glamour photography on here, how would you get the two confused, there to different genre's, lingerie and glamour.

My photo if you looked closely is stylized, has substance, is sexy but conveys a nice mood also. no offense to anyone, but it's not just some girl with caution tag covering her chest, or hand bra's, or bent over towards the camera with suggestive facial expressions> sucking on a lolly,banana or their finger = all glamour type photography.

+ the genre I shot in is by no means unusual, but the fact people say they can feel something from it even though you can't see the models face/ expression > is Unusual, as appose to the model looking in the camera lens so you can't help but feel something.

I couldn't have shot this shot.

It's just a girl sitting on a branch (I don't feel anything when I look at it) quite meaning less, there's no mood or feeling.

Dragon Ink Photography wrote:
Love the image, and it could be something I shoot, but I wouldn't have picked this image because she's "missing" an arm.  Small nitpick, but that's why I wouldn't pick it. 

She didn't paint 'er nails on that hand  .  .  .  ain't models weird  .  .  . 

SOS

sospix wrote:

She didn't paint 'er nails on that hand  .  .  .  ain't models weird  .  .  . 

SOS

Rachel Reilly wrote:
Got skipped

if I didnt have dreads I could probably be your avi. No offense but I bet a lot of girls could be
But even then, I'm brunette. I could still take that same exact picture though.

She does have quite deep set eyes that I don't have

Rachel Reilly wrote:
Got skipped

I don't do fitness/bathing suit photography

I guess that was my fault, sorry I got confused

*not next...just wanted to say sorry

Alixx Rose wrote:

if I didnt have dreads I could probably be your avi. No offense but I bet a lot of girls could be
But even then, I'm brunette. I could still take that same exact picture though.

She does have quite deep set eyes that I don't have

couldnt be mine cause I dont have dreads

Victoria Herrera wrote:

I guess that was my fault, sorry I got confused

*not next...just wanted to say sorry

and yours couldnt be mine cause I dont have such a perfect nose

Maruschke wrote:

and yours couldnt be mine cause I dont have such a perfect nose

Because I look more like Pocahontas than Snow White

Victoria Herrera wrote:

Because I look more like Pocahontas than Snow White

I would even out the skin more. I also haven't had the pleasure of working with this lovely model.

Dan K Photography wrote:

I would even out the skin more. I also haven't had the pleasure of working with this lovely model.

I've never been fortunate enough to work with Kristin Quinn.

PTPhotoUT wrote:

I've never been fortunate enough to work with Kristin Quinn.

The avatar wouldn't be mine because it doesn't have the depth and range of tones that I value.

I don't see any fundamental reason why I wouldn't have shot this though, other than I've never been to the Bonneville Salt Flats where there was water.  The centering of this doesn't bother me here; I think I would've cropped it like this too.  I like it, it's just not what I try to do.

Fist Full of Ish wrote:
The avatar wouldn't be mine because it doesn't have the depth and range of tones that I value.

I don't see any fundamental reason why I wouldn't have shot this though, other than I've never been to the Bonneville Salt Flats where there was water.  The centering of this doesn't bother me here; I think I would've cropped it like this too.  I like it, it's just not what I try to do.

Avi above me couldn't be mine because I wouldn't do that kind of concept. Not because she's nude implied, but because the concept just comes off as a little...cheesy(sorry ). She also looks a tad awkward facially....

Fist Full of Ish wrote:

The avatar wouldn't be mine because it doesn't have the depth and range of tones that I value.

I don't see any fundamental reason why I wouldn't have shot this though, other than I've never been to the Bonneville Salt Flats where there was water.  The centering of this doesn't bother me here; I think I would've cropped it like this too.  I like it, it's just not what I try to do.

Not the kind of model I'd shoot, and the colors and texture are not my style either.

dd photography wrote:
Woops this is Zong!
Would not have cropped that way, either before or after. Really does not create a flattering or edgy image.

You skipped me silly you :

David Coward:

Avi couldnt be mine because I dont have arm tats....but really, it comes off just a tad boring.

Fist Full of Ish wrote:
Bear, ...
Lovely, but I wouldn't crop it like this, straight down your arm and cut at your wrist.  A re-crop, and yeah.  I'd finish it differently.

DavidCoward Photography is next, I think.

I don't know who is next anymore, so I'll do yours.
Same reason, she's not in a Lolita dress :p Therefore, couldn't be mine xD

Alicia Hansen wrote:
Couldn't be mine since the hair color is off and don't wear much lolita.

I wouldn't even know where to begin to make a self portrait that good. Even assuming I was as pretty as she is.

Dan K Photography wrote:
I wouldn't even know where to begin to make a self portrait that good. Even assuming I was as pretty as she is.

Couldn't be mine because....

I would have chosen a slightly lower viewpoint for two reasons, one to maximise available contrast on darker stockings and two, also to make those loooong legs even longer.

A M U L wrote:

I think you'll find it's a lingerie shot, it's not at all Glamour, there so much glamour photography on here, how would you get the two confused, there to different genre's, lingerie and glamour.

My photo if you looked closely is stylized, has substance, is sexy but conveys a nice mood also. no offense to anyone, but it's not just some girl with caution tag covering her chest, or hand bra's, or bent over towards the camera with suggestive facial expressions> sucking on a lolly,banana or their finger = all glamour type photography.

+ the genre I shot in is by no means unusual, but the fact people say they can feel something from it even though you can't see the models face/ expression > is Unusual, as appose to the model looking in the camera lens so you can't help but feel something.

I couldn't have shot this shot.

It's just a girl sitting on a branch (I don't feel anything when I look at it) quite meaning less, there's no mood or feeling.

Wow, jeeze.  I said I liked it.  It is a very good image and definately high class.  The point of this thread was to say why the avatar above wouldn't be yours. I'm sorry if I got the terminology wrong.  Instead of glamour I probably should have said "obviously sexual" in that the main focus is on her arse, descriptive words aren't my strong point.  No need to get so touchy.

Sorry people, please skip me.

Sorry how do you know what the main focus is?, was you there when I took the shot?, Oh sorry you're psychic. FYI the model was in movement and I happen to capture that angle.

Obviously sexual?, as that was least of my concern, shall I prioritize:

model
location
light
contrast
shadows
attire
composition
iso
aperture
shutter

then as you put it "obviously sexual", because you knew what kind of shot I was wanting to create/ going to create.

In my opinion what you did was say it's a good image but it's a little cheap/ tacky for my liking, so it couldn't have been mind.

Is it because I don't have a picture of a crotch in any of my pictures.

^^^ Well you read minds, so I'm sure I'm free to make a small assumption.

Lets call it quits ay...

I'm not going to talk about your work, I reckon you should probably stop talking about mine.

BlueMoonPics wrote:
I'm going to skip Amul as requested and do the one above.
That avatar wouldn't be mine because I usually like to showcase the model's beautiful face and I like to make my avatars cover the frame for impact.

It couldn't be mine because Her eyes are so amazing!

sospix wrote:
Couldn't be mine, cause I don't know where Georgia iz  .  .  . 

SOS

Not mine because most NYC woman would say "So you want me lay on the ground?...in my all white outfit?....oh really?"

Cynthia Serrano  wrote:
not mine because it is a guy and paul won't shoot with me

Not mine because I've never found a model with lips that fabulous!

Bear wrote:
Not mine because I don't think I'll look that gorgeous at 36....,plus I have no red shorts like that :p

The main reason is that you're in California, and I'm in Missouri.

I could have easily shot that pose, and I love the expression. I'm sure I would have had you in front of a different background (studio or location). I would have lit the photo differently. And I would have cropped it differently. But the overall look... I'll take it.

Barely StL wrote:

The main reason is that you're in California, and I'm in Missouri.

I could have easily shot that pose, and I love the expression. I'm sure I would have had you in front of a different background (studio or location). I would have lit the photo differently. And I would have cropped it differently. But the overall look... I'll take it.

Not mine, as I am yet to do this pose and my hair isn't long enough yet, I wish it was mine though

_ Robyn Elizabeth _ wrote:
Not mine, as I am yet to do this pose and my hair isn't long enough yet, I wish it was mine though

It wouldn't be mine bc I'd like to show more of my face in my avatar

I would like to see more of your beautiful face

Emmiq wrote:

It wouldn't be mine bc I'd like to show more of my face in my avatar

I would like to see more of your beautiful face

It wouldn't be mine because it is not shot in some bizarre location, it's generally glamorous,  and it includes clothing.

I Ference Photography wrote:

It wouldn't be mine because it is not shot in some bizarre location, it's generally glamorous,  and it includes clothing.

Not mine because of two words: Insane Asylum