Very nice. Great work by photographer and model. Backlight elevates it. Paul via phone
> On Sep 24, 2015, at 8:25 PM, Bruce Walker <bruce.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Igor, I always appreciate that you take the time to render thoughtful > opinions. I'll try and address most of your points. > >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 5:43 PM, Igor PDML-StR <pdml...@komkon.org> wrote: >> >> Bruce, >> >> I second Cotty's summary word by word (even though we probably differ in >> detail). >> >> Being less diplomatic than Cotty, I can give some specifics if you are >> interested. > > I am, thank you. > > >> I especially liked 1, 4, 11, 12, even though #11 might look >> somhhwat cliche (or was it your photo that I've seen before? ;-) ) > > Pretty sure I've shown that here as a PESO. Could be wrong though, > I've kinda lost track. > > >> (If those were mine, I would probably try to tone down slightly the window >> light reflection from the RHS wall in #4) > > I think that's actually blown out though. Would mean some serious > Photoshop'ing. :) > > >> Unless it was a part of some special story, I'd say the toilet in the >> background of #5,6 is not as glamorous as the rest. > > We all liked the vintage bathroom and just had to work with it. I'm > not partial to including toilets in shots (generally: yuck!), but > <shrug> it was there and I decided to go along with it. I've been > practicing being less anal than is my usual tendency to see where that > takes me. My 90mm lens restricted my sightlines though. I had to stand > outside the bathroom shooting in, mostly. > > >> I like the idea of using reflections in #6,7, but it would've been better if >> the mirror were cleaner in #7. :-) But I suspect that it may not have >> been a planned shot (has it?). > > I asked my shooting partner Judi to bring a mirror and she produced > her makeup mirror. I did not inspect it for grunge -- whoops! It was > my inspiration to ask the model to hold it, and Judi suggested the > "put on makeup" angle. > > Nothing was really pre-planned except that we all arrive at that > location at the same time for a shoot. :) In fact, both myself and > Judi brought lighting gear, but none of it got used at all. I liked > the ambient light and as I was the designated lighting designer, we > shot all ambient. > > >> From the entire set, only two are somewhat bothering me: >> In #8, the pose is too static (as in obviously posed). It looks obvious that >> she was standing in that pose for some time. It is present in some other >> shots, but the frozen muscle strain is not as obvious in those. > > That's not true. I honestly don't see where you are getting evidence > of muscle strain from. She's way OOF and what texture you can see on > her back is her ribcage. > > Besides, Araina is not a pose-holder. She is a very dynamic poser and > moves fluidly and quickly from one to the next. If you don't focus and > shoot fast you miss many. :) > > I would sometimes say "please hold that" when I saw a great pose that > I just needed to get but that would be for maybe 5 seconds, tops. > > Now, I agree that #8 is perhaps one of the oddest poses, but I'm > looking for unobvious looks and poses to liven things up. I got the > idea to pose with her reflection looking back at us and I worked it > for a little while and was never 100% happy. This was one of the > better ones, but as it didn't quite click for me I'm not surprised > that you (and many) don't go for it. That's okay as quite a few have > remarked on it and quite like it. Yeah it's weird, and has a toilet in > it, but on a site where most of the women are standing around in > cliche'd poses and locations looking bored, this makes you take > notice. :) > >> Sorry, from the previous discussion, I suspect that it doesn't bother you. > > I try these things on to see. I like to get feedback yay or nay, so thanks. > > >> In #10, with that counterlight, - it's an interesting effect, but I wish it >> was softer with that. I don't know how that can be reached. >> I am thinking that a "soft" portrait lens (Pentax FA-85) might work for >> that, even though I've never used one. This photo is too softer than a sharp >> one, but just not soft enough for that "creamy" cloud-of-dream look. >> I don't know, - maybe some local PS experts (Mark?) know how to enhance that >> in post? > > I hear you. I worked very hard to get the right amount of veiling > flare to get a soft look, and the lens I was using -- the DFA645 90mm > f:2.8 Macro -- just would not flare. It's a beast of a lens, and one > of the best that Pentax has ever made I think. Anyway, this was one of > a handful of shots where with the sun coming straight into the lens > from the model's RHS, I got some nice dreamy softness, though mainly > just on that side. > > There aren't any special "soft portrait" lenses available for the 645Z > that I'm aware of. But you have got me thinking, and I should do some > research to see what was made over the years. Maybe I can eBay one. > > In general though, I only like to buy current new stock. I only own > two 645 lenses: the 55mm f2.8 SDM and the 90mm f2.8 Macro SDM. > > BTW, I have plenty of Photoshop methods available to soften the shot > and make it dreamier, but I chose to leave it at that level. My > portrait plugin has a really good emulation of soft portrait lenses > that I've used in the past for glamour/boudoir style shots. > > >> Igor > > Thanks, Igor! > > >> PS. The website design is weird: clicking on the thumbnail of the "active" >> photo moves the thumbnail tape to the top, and the active photo disappears, >> so you'd have to reload the page and start over. And that's in 4 different >> browsers on Windows. I understand that it is not your website. > > Until you mentioned it I had not experienced that bug. But as I was > writing my responses to you it occurred a few times to me. I think you > jinxed the site, Igor. :) > > The site has launched a recent code change that includes all kinds of > Javascript bugs that prevent quite a few features from working. I > suspect they must be working behind the scenes to fix a raft of > issues. > > >> >> Steve Cottrell Thu, 24 Sep 2015 13:09:50 -0700 wrote: >> >> On 24/9/15, Bruce Walker, discombobulated, unleashed: >> >>> NSFW for mild topless nudity. A baker's dozen shots ... >>> >>> https://www.zivity.com/models/Araina/photosets/57 >>> >>> These images are from my first shoot with local model Araina Nespiak >>> in August. Taken in a borrowed conference space in Mississauga. >> >> >> >> Great job as usual. Regarding style, some I'm not bothered about but >> some are superb. Really really superb. > > > -- > -bmw > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
