Image #1-
Nice light. Brave crop with the head chop at the top, but it works because it serves a purpose of drawing us more to her eyes. Not done for the intent of being edgy or trendy.
Too saturated.
Skin too processed ( intentional or not).
Fingers at bottom of image not helpful. Akin to chopping at a joint inappropriately.
Nice image that parents would enjoy. More of the same from this OP as far as viewing here goes, so lost interest.
No personal attack. If reviewers here are pussycats, it's because fear of retribution from fanboys and less than graceful acceptance from OP.
She can defend her work. But some grace would go a long way.
By the same token, I can say, "zz" if I find it boring and less exceptional than the club.
There you go, Airfrog.
But to saturation. That is a personal decision and this matches the look of her other work. I am usually one that doesn't care for to much saturation but I don't think this is to much and works in this portrait and in the context of her other work. And as far as crops go I say if its important and helps the visual statement then leave it in. In this case I feel this is about the girls eyes and face. Not the fingers. I'm not so sure the crop is that brave. It puts the eyes in a safe place. I usually don't comment on the way people crop because thats also a very personal thing and goes to the overall look of someones work. If it were me I would have probably cropped tighter moving the eyes higher in the frame but it's not me and I think it works fine as is.
Do you think I'm graceful when someone is telling me to crop out a repeating shape that goes to the very heart and composition of my image? I don't care who on the web likes my work. If it's on the web and it's my professional work as long as I'm consistently exceeding my clients expectations and the check clears I'm good. My personal work I hope that everyone doesn't understand it all the time. That would mean I am always playing it safe and not pushing my vision.
splay wrote:
No, he wasn't. He was stating a fact.
I miss the posts from that fella who did awesome portraits. He also hired out post work for more edgy stuff. Can't recall his name for the life of me. If anyone gave his work negative crit, he always came back with, "no problem." and then he truly left it alone. It was as if to say, "opinions vary. I get it."
He didn't require constant stroking and affirmation. Anyone remember his name and know why he left here? Vague description, I know...
philz, or phlitz or something like that...
funny I haven't seen lisa get this pissy since the last time someone had something less than perfect to say about one of her photos...
Nice to see how we all stayed on critique of the image.
And fanboy? These are the folks I would say I'm a fan boy of:
I am anxious to see the film
but I do think Lisa has a style that many lack.
And when I say fan boy Davidson, Meyerowitz, Mary Ellen Mark, Elliott Erwitt are influences but really stop at that. But I can discuss work and why I like or dislike it. Looks like some here have a problem doing that and would rather stoop to childish name calling and personal attacks.
Hi Lisa,
I have been lurking in the background, slightly amused and sometimes just upset with some of the posts regarding touch up, etc.
First of all, your photography is impeccable and I love your lighting. Could you explain your lighting in more detail.
Also my definition of a "CRITIC". A critic is someone that wished that he or she could do the work like a colleague but can't so they pick the work apart in order to satisfy themselves and to put them on the same level.
I really admire your work. I have been in photography a long, long time and I have seen many great portraits but not many with your lighting skills.
respectfully,
David Miller
Thank you all for taking the time to look and comment! Mom is very happy with these pics and has already booked me to photograph her 5 year old son also, so it's all good!
One quick question, what kind of flower is she holding in 2 and 7? I'm guessing daisies? I can't quite identify it from the photo alone.
For me it's also the lighting and the use of complimentary color that makes these photos. I can deduce some of the lighting setup from the eyes, but I am curious if it is naturally backlit?
Each of these images is naturally lit only - no reflector, no artificial lighting sources. The flowers were just some random mountain wildflowers that were growing in the location we shot at, so I picked some and had her hold them.
Ah, I asked because you have to be careful with the yellow ones, esp. random ones, a lot of yellow flowers have negative meanings like disdain, rejection, jealousy, infidelity, sorrow, broken heart, betrayal, treachery, or hopeless love.
zz" if I find it boring and less exceptional than the club.
