Chris a beautiful young woman. You having her laying in a field is very creative! As a viewer, not good with portrait types, her hands on her face with the most of her body cut off doesn't present enough of her to admire further. Just my $.02!
Her blouse compliments the flowers very well and more of that might present a more "whole composition". If that makes any sense.
But she is beautiful and sensuous!
Well done despite my comments!
Dan
elliot-kramer wrote:
I have a feeling this is a composite image. That background was put in later. Right?
It doesn't look like a composite to me. The depth of field looks very realistic and the lighting on the flowers and grass appears to be coming from the same direction as the lighting on face.
I agree with Elliot, I think it's a composite. In her hair upper left (our right), there are two straight line cuts which doesn't look natural. The green underneath the hair there has no shadows, which would be inconsistent with anything under something, especially with the light coming from the left (see the shadows on her left cheek, our right). The other thing that indicates to me it's a composite is the grass on the lower left (her right side). There's grass there, but nowhere else in the picture is there grass.
My other note is that I agree with everyone else that the crop is too tight. This looks to me like a very good pic, not sure why OP didn't just stick with the grass and if he didn't shoot it that tight, I'd like to see it wider. This could be a really nice image!
Agree on the crop/framing. A square (showing more below) would have been perfect IMHO. Overall very nice "eye candy" type of image!
Composite - I don't think so, but it may have been enhanced (adding/altering some elements) - (not a full on cut out & replacement). The telling part for me that it's not composite is in the more shadowy areas where there is a great deal of detail alternating between hair and grass behind. It would be near impossible to cut her out like this - the composite approach I would take would be to paint in (fake) hair in those kinds of areas - but it's a very tedious process that takes a lot of skill. It just doesn't look like it IMO.
friscoron wrote:
I agree with Elliot, I think it's a composite. In her hair upper left (our right), there are two straight line cuts which doesn't look natural. The green underneath the hair there has no shadows, which would be inconsistent with anything under something, especially with the light coming from the left (see the shadows on her left cheek, our right). The other thing that indicates to me it's a composite is the grass on the lower left (her right side). There's grass there, but nowhere else in the picture is there grass.
I'm not sure I understand...She is laying on grass. We cut flowers and placed them on the grass around her head.
friscoron wrote:
My other note is that I agree with everyone else that the crop is too tight. This looks to me like a very good pic, not sure why OP didn't just stick with the grass and if he didn't shoot it that tight, I'd like to see it wider. This could be a really nice image!
It's not a crop, this was shot at 85mm with me standing directly over her. I do agree, though. I wish I had a step stool with me, or a wider lens.
KE_Photo wrote:
Agree on the crop/framing. A square (showing more below) would have been perfect IMHO. Overall very nice "eye candy" type of image!
Composite - I don't think so, but it may have been enhanced (adding/altering some elements) - (not a full on cut out & replacement). The telling part for me that it's not composite is in the more shadowy areas where there is a great deal of detail alternating between hair and grass behind. It would be near impossible to cut her out like this - the composite approach I would take would be to paint in (fake) hair in those kinds of areas - but it's a very tedious process that takes a lot of skill. It just doesn't look like it IMO....Show more →
The only thing I did in post to the background was to add a few flowers to fill in some gaps, but they are real flowers and real grass.
Well, Technically speaking, if you added flowers, that makes it a composite. There are some see-through green parts, particularly in her hair on the left.
elliot-kramer wrote:
Well, Technically speaking, if you added flowers, that makes it a composite. There are some see-through green parts, particularly in her hair on the left.
Was this what you were referring to when you initially said that it looked like a composite? You thought that a few of the flowers were added and she was posed lying down in the grass?
story_teller wrote:
Composite or not, it's still a very nice image.
I agree!
Composite or not, I am enjoying your image. Take the suggestions as constructive, inform members if they have mis-viewed/processed the image and post more!
Dan
rocket88 wrote:
The only thing I did in post to the background was to add a few flowers to fill in some gaps, but they are real flowers and real grass.
Thanks for chiming in! So in other words, I nailed it. ha ha. Some people might like to split hairs on technicality, but adding or fixing minor things in an image doesn't qualify as a true composite image IMO. I think you did very well in spotting the location, envisioning and executing the concept.
KE_Photo wrote:
Thanks for chiming in! So in other words, I nailed it. ha ha. Some people might like to split hairs on technicality, but adding or fixing minor things in an image doesn't qualify as a true composite image IMO. I think you did very well in spotting the location, envisioning and executing the concept.
Agreed.
Some people might like to split hairs on technicality, but adding or fixing minor things in an image doesn't qualify as a true composite image IMO. I think you did very well in spotting the location, envisioning and executing the concept.