Lee Wiren wrote:
I am not so much concerned for the OP to take photo's of anybody of any age... I guess (and this is MY opinion only, however much you may think it stinks - it's just that, my opinion) but more of the style and pose of a person that appears to be underage. Certainly, she may be over 18, all fine and good - but if it were me (and I may be an outcast here on my thinking), if I were to post a shot of a gal who looks quite so young, I would note that the model is indeed over 18 so that it doesn't seem like I took an uncomfortable looking, risque shot of a person who looks like they could be underage. So, castigate me if you will, it just appears to be a shot of an uncomfortable, under-age girl who isn't sure she should be getting this photo done and if the OP stated that the person was indeed over 18, then I would not have made my statement.
For my other critique, hot spots, the cut off right hand.. the tilt of the photo helps add to the appearance that she is falling off the chair.... this doesn't do it for me. Maybe that's the look the OP was going for... I too looked at his other work and this by far is not his best in my opinion...
I have the right to me opinion Jim, disagree with me as you will, it's the way I felt upon first impression and I have the right to express that.... if the OP doesn't want that kind of critique for improvement of his images, then post elsewhere, I won't sugarcoat my critique in fear of offending anybody.
I find that those that complain the loudest never post their own body of work to prove that they have the experience and credentials to offer constructive and realistic critique. Just giving an opinion means nothing, anyone can do that. What makes you the expert.
ESC in KC wrote:
Good point. Always better to look the other way and stay mum when there is a potentially inappropriate issue involving children.
To the OP - thanks for clarifying and understanding the issue that was raised. She is unusually young looking for her age and when it comes to this type of photography, some people can understandably feel cautious.
Nice job on second posted photo.
So are we now supposed to post disclaimers with every photo we post ?
"no animals were harmed in the creation of this photo"
"every person in this photo is over the age of 18"
"no laws were broken in the creation of this image"
Come on, society has far too much oversensitive drama already. Artists should be able to post their work without the internet police looking over their shoulder for every little possible
misstep waiting to pounce on it. Chill. It's stuff like this that keeps members in the shadows instead of sharing for fear of being bullied by members who think that just because they can type that it gives them the right to say whatever they want without repercussion.
ESC in KC wrote:
IF (and I mean IF) she were underage, then I would completely AGREE that the pose is too provocative (unzipped pants showing lacy panties) and inappropriate. Photos like this are not just "having a picture taken" if a minor is involved.
I also thought the moment I saw it that she appeared to be 16 yrs old at best. To me, Lee was not at all out of line to question the age of the model.
Regarding the photo - it's just not good. Over exposed, awkward pose, bad cropping, distracting setting, and too overt in its attempt to be sexy. ...Show more →
+1
I don't like #1 due to what everyone said (just the TECHNICAL aspects of the image). I think #2 is way better, the lighting, the expression and the composition. Great improvement. That's all I have as I am not a studio photographer AND being 44 I CANNOT even attempt to guess the age of ANYONE anymore!
Good use of vibrant clothing to offset the lightness of the model's skin and that shows up well. What would have helped additionally is a different color backdrop, not just white as it pales out her skin too much.
