Garry k wrote:
( besides my flat lighting )

?

The good: you don't have the hands over the head, often my worst enemy. Yet give the girls something to do. Timing has to play with them, hands down is good, yet posed is not, if it looks like it wasn't a moment captured. A lot of your pictures look like you are not letting the girls move. Almost if you are saying hold this or that pose. For haute couture it is required for everything thing else no.

Lighting: Outdoors you are watching for the model, when she looks good. That is the positive.  Lighting: you're not watching how to make the picture great with light. You have to stop thinking like the guys that buy too much junk like silly reflectors and start watching the light before the model ever steps into play.

Voila fellow Canuck.

Christie Gabriel wrote:
oh me, me!

Okay the good. Fabulous lines. When you strike the pose all is well. Unstoppable poses with a perfect fashion body. And, the face follows the pose with intent.

The bad: you are showing way too much, too many styles, too many old pictures.

How to do better: reduce your port so I see only the best. I will never shoot a model if their book has over retouched images. The big agencies here refuse all images too 'shopped.  So, more free pictures, less retouching, showing the power you have.

Arrange what you have to tell a story. Show how sublime you are. You have enough pix to do that. Stop doing favours for lesser photographers. Present yourself like a million, without ego, and you will find there are a lot out there that really appreciate who your are.

Jonte Campbell wrote:
I'd like to hear your feedback !

The good, you shoot on location so your models are at ease and relate to the environment around them.

How to do better. First shadows are friends not enemies. Follow around your models and find some to break up the image. You are placing your models in mostly front lighting and the shadows are not part of the image, or at least the image building aspect of your pix.

Yet the shadow has to be an element of design, not something to obscure.

A little less smoothness too would make me want to look more>

Steven Lemmens wrote:
Check!


Me Out!

Well you do watch for contrast and light usually ( yet you missed some).

How to do better:   you need to stop posing the models in expected poses. In the posy pictures there isn't one I remember after going through them all.

You have some pix with a bit of surprise, yet your main body of work is lacking of trying something different.

PS. The collages few people will ever look at so that is a no-no. IF you cannot edit or select from a mass of images it doesn't help to schluff them together  in a web sized collage.

Your outdoors picture the first row horizontals and the last two are really good.

Gazzu wrote:
I'm game

The good: you are young and convey that.

Styling, keep to the funky stuff, you don't look like David Beckham so don't go there. Be you, proudly so.

Which brings me to: improve by making contact. You are not often connecting. Distant but not with conviction. Modeling is make believe. Play your part.

Jorge Kreimer wrote:
Please do! I normally don't take critiques seriously, but this one I will.

Yours is harder to say.

Quite accomplished, spot on lighting for what you like, good choice of models, playful, some surprises too.

Yet to improve, you have to say stop to whichever styles you succeeded in in your vision. It looks like you're in a continuous loop.  Great nudes, nice shapes, then on to the next girl and same thing. Practice makes perfect but you're forgetting you made it already.

Get more feeling going, think of a story even if trite. Play up on your movie director role, more story with that extra light. Look up a friend Jaques Olivar. Or Terry Richardson. Keep at doing new stuff, you really know the light, space.

Your nudes ( the classic ones) are a little void of emotion a little too naked if you. Must be a way of thinking like Newton to get you over that hurdle, and let the models play for you.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Did I get in, Professor?

You have great graphics on most. You're a designer.

To improve: first loose the pictures that don't belong, pills dog etc.

Loose everything that doesn't have that graphic approach. Look at everything Peter Turner ever did. Follow your instincts and stop trying to do other stuff. Each time you try to do something which your not it shows, and not in a good way. Your graphic pictures, are great. Why pull yourself down with the rest? No one knows what or who you are until you say it in pictures.

A N D E R S O N wrote:
Please!

The good: when you're good you are so darn good.

Bad well the opposite.

to improve: watch light , each subject needs different lighting even if the result looks similar. In the end it is not. Light for a subject int he wrong place cries out.
Luck is not acceptable for your level. Stop trying to do hard light with the wrong tools. Shoot outdoors more, or in daylight. If you shoot studio because you like making it hard for yourself, try to master one light.

Neil Snape wrote:

You have great graphics on most. You're a designer.

To improve: first loose the pictures that don't belong, pills dog etc.

Loose everything that doesn't have that graphic approach. Look at everything Peter Turner ever did. Follow your instincts and stop trying to do other stuff. Each time you try to do something which your not it shows, and not in a good way. Your graphic pictures, are great. Why pull yourself down with the rest? No one knows what or who you are until you say it in pictures.

Excellent. Thanks for your time on these.

Merry P wrote:
I think I have an idea of what you'll say, but I'd love to hear it and anything else you think!

The good, great style, portrait style, lovely models, and quite good light.

How to improve:  you have the hair all wrong. When you should be raw and unkempt, it's the opposite. Try to let the models be a little more edgy or young or less than perfect. Leave that BS for old guys like me that know no better.

Look up Thomas Lavelle, or our Nicolas Guerin, Damon Baker all doing something with story with young people you shoot, in a less perfect way.

Neil Snape wrote:

The good, great style, portrait style, lovely models, and quite good light.

How to improve:  you have the hair all wrong. When you should be raw and unkempt, it's the opposite. Try to let the models be a little more edgy or young or less than perfect. Leave that BS for old guys like me that know no better.

Look up Thomas Lavelle, or our Nicolas Guerin, Damon Baker all doing something with story with young people you shoot, in a less perfect way.

Thanks Neil, that's excellent advice and I really appreciate it!

I'll take it on board and adjust to it, thank you.

Eros Fine Art Photo wrote:
I don't just want to be good; I want to be GREAT.  What am I missing?  Why does my stuff always seem to fall just short?

The good: lovely tones, poses, well lit.

To improve: you've mastered the classic. We all can see that. Yet where is the spirit of the models here? They are perfect classics, beautiful tones. Yet we are in a visual world that turns the iPad images faster than you can flip yellow pages.
I think you should look at Robert Voltaire. Classic yes, but the model is always the first thing you feel and react to. With your light, and composition you can do anything, but put the spirit there first and you'll be on your way to being great.

Neil Snape wrote:

Must be a way of thinking like Newton to get you over that hurdle, and let the models play for you.

Thank you for your input, Neil. I understand and agree with everything you said, but could you expand on the comment above? The meaning is a bit unclear to me.

Thank you!

Jorge Kreimer wrote:
Thank you for your input, Neil. I understand and agree with everything you said, but could you expand on the comment above? The meaning is a bit unclear to me.

Thank you!

Look at some work by Helmut Newton.

(not Sir Isaac Newton!)

I think

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
Look at some work by Helmut Newton.

(not Sir Isaac Newton!)

I think

I have the big Taschen book, I know what he looks like,

Now to think like Newton, that's a whole different ballgame.