Marcel VanEerd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.19 #1 · 2009 FIRST SENIOR // BRIAN | |
prof_fate wrote:
You perhaps need to go back to the third response on page one. I don't think I said anything of the sort. I said nothing about him as a person. I said he needs to learn posing. Did I compare his images to an 'established standard'? Yes. Of course. What other of kind of standard is there? I compared them to senior pictures. Not studio, not flowers, not sports. If he had said they were art photos then I'd have used a different standard as a comparison. But as senior [ipotraits they do not meet the established standard.
No, I don't know his clients and that was addressed in the my first post as well. If the client liked them then that's great, these images are a success from that standpoint.
To save you the time of paging back, here is my critique for you to re-read, since you obviously missed it the first time around.
I am not familiar with your work so I can't say this is trademark or not. As senior portraits go these are not very good. Nice images, great for a model, etc, but not what sells to seniors.
What is the purpose of senior pictures? Two - money for the photographer and only you know what this kid/parent spent. Secondly to document their entry into adulthood, basically. They are, more or less, at their physical prime but yet very self concsious and unsure of themselves. Most are still very much under their parent's shadow/protection/support (kids in many ways, not yet adults).
Senior Pictures should make them feel grown up, important, independent, persons of substance, showcase their accomplishments, record them (favorably) at this point in their lives.
OK, your first pic maks the kid seem small, lost and insignificant. Most teens feel this way without you emphasizing it to them.
Of the second 'pair' of images the first he has a goofy look on his face. A non-seller. The second isn't bad, a but much PP IMO and the angle has his ears looking odd - on both sides of his head. Not flattering or attractive. Not portraiture.
The empty lot with a bum in it and the kid very OOF? Try being sober next time. Or perhaps get mom drunk - this isn't a pic that will sell you to other parents/kids.
Four works.
Five, a pair - second works. First has very odd composition, distracting BG (Sky) and a nasty expression on his face. Not something mom will want on her wall or he'll want to hand out to his friends to be remembered by.
chest down shot..art perhaps, but a portrait without even the head in it is NOT a portrait. Might work as part of a collage. Again, not something other parents/kids will see and say "Yeah, that's the look I want for my year book shot!"
Sitting on the tele pole...by now I'm getting very tired of his strait square look at the camera pose. You need to learn posing. More variety if for no other reason. This pose does nothing to make the subject look good. sloping shoulders, bad hand posing, crotch aimed directly at the camera, etc.
the last 'pair'. The one on the right is much better than the one on the left - hey look, he's not staring straight into the camera! the tree needs to go, it's got no reason to be in the image and is distracting.
Overal you need to learn posing, composition, direction of your subject and get the hell out of photoshop. Make good solid images and then perhaps spice a few up with actions. PS effects do not make up for undsound fundamentals....Show more →
I STILL feel your cleverly disguised comments as "critique" tell me as much about your feelings toward Sergio as a person in addition to your sentiments of him as a photog. The way you worded your comments - you'll never convince me otherwise. If I didn't know better, I'd say a lot of your comments come from envy; regardless of Sergio's inability to shoot properly, its HE who's getting the feedback I think you so desperately are looking for to justify your work. (IF I didn't know better, of course)
|
Please lock down this non going thread
