I see.
And just as a followup thought (which is probably obvious): I didn't mean
that dance experience of a model is needed (even though it could be a big
added bonus). And in reverse, I am not sure that all good dancers would
make good models.
After having written, a constructive idea came to my mind:
I am thinking if the same shot as you did would work better if
the models where lying (horizontally), while the camera would be right
above them. That would allow an easier back-curve "matching", while avoiding
unnecessary strain.
But then, it might be harder to accomplish, unless you have some type of
gantry or a boom lift in the studio (or a 2-level loft with a balcony).
... but the models you have are better than that equipment. :-)
Igor
Bruce Walker Fri, 09 Sep 2016 11:09:18 -0700 wrote:
Zooming right to the point, I agree with you, Igor, that the more
relaxed the posing the better the results. And harmony is certainly
what I hope to get if possible. I thought that my two models did quite
well following my directions, but no doubt a number of factors would
have resulted in falling short of perfection.
Dorrie on the right is 5 inches shorter than Camille, and Camille's
trunk is longer than Dorrie's. Neither of them dances. I put Dorrie on
a step stool then iteratively directed them as they tried to fit their
curved backs together. It likely took over a minute just to get this
one pose.
Oh, and Dorrie and Camille met for the first time at this shoot, 45
minutes before this shot. And this was the first time I had ever
worked with two nude models.
If I had a couple of trained dancers who also worked together, I bet I
could get even a better overall look.
But as they say, the best nude models are the ones you have with you.
:)
Thanks, as always for your well considered thoughts, Igor. Appreciated!
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Igor PDML-StR <pdml...@komkon.org> wrote:
Cuteing edge photography? ;-)
Bruce,
Nice idea and photo.
But there is something that bothered me when I looked at the photo in the
morning, and it still does, when I am looking at it again.
You might remember that I've been photographing dancers. And having been
dancing myself a several different "vernacular" dances, I appreciate the
ergonomics of the dance. And I am convinced that ergonomic dancing yields the
true beauty of the dance, both social and performance versions.
Over the years, I've had extensive discussions on this and related topics
(including photographs of dancers) with several respectful dance instructors
from difference dances.
While sharing my thoughts dancers and photographers in my workshops on how to
make better photographs of dancers (from both sides), I've analyzed together
with the workshop participants the visible level of ergonomics/comfort in
different photos. And a couple of relevant aspects of that are: (1) It is
usually easy to see if the photo was taken in motion (dynamic) or while
hitting the pose statically.
And (2) in both dynamic and even in static photos, one can usually see how
ergonomic that pose was. This is especially apparent in couple's dances.
All this long prelude is to describe where my comment is stemming from.
(As it is a rather different perspective than that of your photography.)
We've already discussed the issue of pose ergonomics back in June of 2014.
So, forgive me for repeating certain aspects of the same ideas introduction
now, 2+ years later.
Now, to the point:
What keeps swirling in my mind is that in this photo the pose is rather
uncomfortable for the model on the right.
I might be wrong, but I don't think you were going after tension in this
case, as I think it was the harmony. I think if the pose were more
comfortable, the photo would radiate more harmony.
But maybe you had a different intent. Hence my curiousity: Did you?
Igor
ann sanfedele Fri, 09 Sep 2016 08:20:31 -0700 wrote:
cutting edge photography :-)
nice
ann
On 9/9/2016 9:28 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
Next in my Body Language series.
http://portfolio.brucemwalker.com/index/I000070xb_T3x.lY
nsfw: nipples in profile.
645z, dfa645 90mm/2.8 macro, f:13, 1/125th sec, 100 ISO
Comments always welcome!
--
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.
