Merry Jane
Posts: 986
Thief River Falls, Minnesota, US
Got some more images back from working with Billy Monday #7980. I was wondering if I should add any. I already have a couple, but I am actually quite fond of these as well.
Let me know what you think, I will give your port a glance and comment on my favorite image.
The first shot is the best one. The colors and the mystical nature of the water work great with your pose. It is really beautiful. I would like the third one more if your shoulders were slightly down and your hair was not covering your neck - other then that they are really well done.
Don Garrett
Posts: 3,775
Escondido, California, US
OK, I'm going against the grain here, not because it is my nature, (which it is), but because #1 displays one of my pet peeves - running water that is blurred because of a slow shutter speed. I also think the colors are a bit too saturated and unnatural, and the composition is not to my liking, (I haven't exactly figured that one out yet).
I favor #2. I like the position of the subject crossing what would otherwise be a boring, horizontal composition. I also like the light on the subject, just the right amount, in my opinion.
-Don
Personally, I think #2 is over-processed and not flattering to your hips. #3 is also not a flattering pose.
And while #1 is the most sound image overall, it's more about the technique of the photographer than it is any representation of you as a model.
We see the slow shutter speed technique on the water and highly saturated colors and it would make a good image for a photographer's portfolio. But it isn't an upgrade to a model's portfolio where the images should be about you.
So, for different reasons, I wouldn't add any of them.
Michael Pandolfo wrote: Personally, I think #2 is over-processed and not flattering to your hips. #3 is also not a flattering pose.
And while #1 is the most sound image overall, it's more about the technique of the photographer than it is any representation of you as a model.
We see the slow shutter speed technique on the water and highly saturated colors and it would make a good image for a photographer's portfolio. But it isn't an upgrade to a model's portfolio where the images should be about you.
So, for different reasons, I wouldn't add any of them.
Don Garrett wrote: OK, I'm going against the grain here, not because it is my nature, (which it is), but because #1 displays one of my pet peeves - running water that is blurred because of a slow shutter speed. I also think the colors are a bit too saturated and unnatural, and the composition is not to my liking, (I haven't exactly figured that one out yet).
I favor #2, it is solid. I like the position of the subject crossing what would otherwise be a boring, horizontal composition. I also like the light on the subject, just the right amount, in my opinion.
-Don
I have to agree with Don,,, and blows my mind why so many photographers voted 1.
I have to agree the slow shutter speed could be done better but the thing at blows be away is that the photograph is for a model port. It is done to benefit her and,,, well,,, few things:(1) your face is covered, (2) pet peeve you are unsexed,(3) and my biggest pet peeve you are photographed dead.... (4) the photograph shows the landscape not you... etc. etc. Just makes me,,,, well, just sad...
Images you need will/and should benefit you. You need to work with photographers who do benefit you and understand how and why the image benefits you... This image does not benefit you....
Merry Jane
Posts: 986
Thief River Falls, Minnesota, US
Thank you all for the feedback. I really appreciate your time, and the thought you put into your replies. I chose to put the first image into my portfolio.
Some have replied that the image is not beneficial for me because it does not show me off as a model. I am an art model, so this does not concern me. I am in it for the art, and occasionally make good money posing nude. I won't be successful in any other genre due to my stats and look. Bill and I collaborated and made artwork that I am very, very happy with, not just meaningless images that "show me off" as a model. It is in no way his fault for not making me the "main subject", or "showing me of", this was a mutual agreement to create wonderful artwork.
Sometimes MM really confuses and disappoints me. Isn't a model there to help complete the image, bring it together, and make it work? I don't see why I shouldn't use an image that would be beneficial to a photographers portfolio as well? Wouldn't that show that I work and take direction well, and can mold into what the photographer has in mind?
Sorry for the rant, but I felt the need to get this out of the way and feel better for getting it out.
Merry Jane wrote: Thank you all for the feedback. I really appreciate your time, and the thought you put into your replies. I chose to put the first image into my portfolio.
Some have replied that the image is not beneficial for me because it does not show me off as a model. I am an art model, so this does not concern me. I am in it for the art, and occasionally make good money posing nude. I won't be successful in any other genre due to my stats and look. Bill and I collaborated and made artwork that I am very, very happy with, not just meaningless images that "show me off" as a model. It is in no way his fault for not making me the "main subject", or "showing me of", this was a mutual agreement to create wonderful artwork.
Sometimes MM really confuses and disappoints me. Isn't a model there to help complete the image, bring it together, and make it work? I don't see why I shouldn't use an image that would be beneficial to a photographers portfolio as well? Wouldn't that show that I work and take direction well, and can mold into what the photographer has in mind?
Sorry for the rant, but I felt the need to get this out of the way and feel better for getting it out.
+1
Yes, and it can work both ways. Not all models see it that way.
I'd use the first image for sure. The second one is a distant second to the first one.
Merry Jane wrote: Thank you all for the feedback. I really appreciate your time, and the thought you put into your replies. I chose to put the first image into my portfolio.
Some have replied that the image is not beneficial for me because it does not show me off as a model. I am an art model, so this does not concern me. I am in it for the art, and occasionally make good money posing nude. I won't be successful in any other genre due to my stats and look. Bill and I collaborated and made artwork that I am very, very happy with, not just meaningless images that "show me off" as a model. It is in no way his fault for not making me the "main subject", or "showing me of", this was a mutual agreement to create wonderful artwork.
Sometimes MM really confuses and disappoints me. Isn't a model there to help complete the image, bring it together, and make it work? I don't see why I shouldn't use an image that would be beneficial to a photographers portfolio as well? Wouldn't that show that I work and take direction well, and can mold into what the photographer has in mind?
Sorry for the rant, but I felt the need to get this out of the way and feel better for getting it out.
If you both are happy with the work then I am happy for you,,, you aked if you should add these I was just giving my 2 cents,,, that's all. As for the benefical??? You are the model trying to work so you need images that show you as a model,,, to inspire more and other photographer to use you not someone else. It is like sending your model friend's port to a job you want...We don't go to Moxie's and ordering a Big Mac, kinda thing. Why can't the photographer use an image that benefits you and him in, his or her port. Makes a win win that's all I was saying.
If your happy with your work, that is the main thing, enjoy what you do...
..and one more vote for #1
etc. etc. Just makes me,,,, well, just sad...
| 
| 
| edu