Matt Anderson Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
film_4ever wrote:
I don't know what you're doing in post, but I'm not a fan.
It looks like you're generating some kind of pseudo-grain effect, especially evident in image 3.
Beautiful model, the lighting is very flat and unappealing. Nice bokeh on the 1.4 !
Thanks for sharing your work.
---------------------------------------------
dmacmillan wrote:
I really like #1. I think #2 should have been photographed from a higher angle or she should have lowered her chin a little.
#3, the B&W, is shot so close that the shallow DOF @1.4 becomes a detriment.
---------------------------------------------
ucphotog wrote:
I love #1 and #2.
#3 is great, but I think it is not my taste. She doesn't look quite real. Almost a doll or manikin. Or maybe it is the large horizontal catch lights? Sorry I can't put my finger on it.
Thanks for sharing.
Dave
---------------------------------------------
Dave McGaughey wrote:
I agree about the processing. Looks like very low clarity was applied globally, then repainted back onto the eyes alone. Kind of creepy, in my opinion.
I think you should have tried to get her to lower her chin a bit and do a little bit of turtling to tighten up the jaw line. It looks very soft with her upturned head.
---------------------------------------------
elliotkramer wrote:
Beautiful woman, but the post processing is very bad. My definition of bad is this - If you can tell there was post processing, it is too much. Viewers should never know whether a portrait was photoshopped or not.
---------------------------------------------
a123 wrote:
I agree with others, not a fan of the processing. However! You have some fantastic work on your website!!
Thanks for your critiques everyone !
|