Heather McCullah
New member
Thoughts on this recent shoot are appreciated.
Last edited:
-
Please use real names.
Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed
Firstname Lastname
Register
We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know! -
Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!
Stunning Model in Water
- Thread starter Heather McCullah
- Start date
Kathy Rappaport
pro member
Plastic
Hi Heather,
As first glace I like the style of the shoot. The model fits in well to a beach/lake and watershoot. But I found a few things that bother. It looks like she has dandruff and on further inspection, I think you added raindrop texture in post so it looks fake if I study the image. Then if I look in the water behind her, I see the string ties to her swimsuit that took a bit to see what they are. I thnk her skin is a bit over smoothed and plastic for my taste.
As someone who has had her images ripped off from posting them to a website, I understand your big watermark, but, it makes it hard to give a fair critique to the photograph. And the last nit is that her eyes are rolled under her eyelids that takes away just a smidge.
I'd love to see the original image.
Hi Heather,
As first glace I like the style of the shoot. The model fits in well to a beach/lake and watershoot. But I found a few things that bother. It looks like she has dandruff and on further inspection, I think you added raindrop texture in post so it looks fake if I study the image. Then if I look in the water behind her, I see the string ties to her swimsuit that took a bit to see what they are. I thnk her skin is a bit over smoothed and plastic for my taste.
As someone who has had her images ripped off from posting them to a website, I understand your big watermark, but, it makes it hard to give a fair critique to the photograph. And the last nit is that her eyes are rolled under her eyelids that takes away just a smidge.
I'd love to see the original image.
Nill Toulme
New member
The color balance seems odd to me... almost like a B&W image that has been colorized. And on an image that is this heavily processed anyway, you might as well clean up the whites of her eyes.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Heather,
I do like the girl and your picture. She well pepped. He smile is lovely and she's attractive. The color is pleasant, but as Nill points out, the whites of the eyes and I'd add the teeth, should be protected or was this intentional?
Kathy, your point about slightly rolled up eyes is at first obviously correct, but immediately following that, I wonder how it would seem with her not looking at us. So yes, this is a good point to look out for. Maybe looking a little lower would even create some more modesty or mystery in the shot.
Asher
A small niggle, Heather, the polishing of the skin does not cover the area above the left eye brow.
This image is difficult to fully appreciate because of the large protection banner. I fully agree with your reticence to expose your image so that it can be readily stolen. I have no doubt that before long we'll have easy traceable tags hidden in the image. For now it's a dilemma. I personally would have no problem cloning over the banner. It would take little time. I agree that devoting myself to the internet for 5 minutes, one could steal many images without such protection.
I myself have inserted my own damaging © statement over a face! This was a picture I planned on using and I was excessively protective. Still the main purpose of the notice is to limit the possibility of the image being called an orphan and so become part of the public domain. For that a small notice at an edge serves that purpose.
Another approach would be to only provide a 400 pixel wide image and 100% cutouts if requested. Certainly, when an image is used to demonstrate the value of a lens or camera, 100% cutouts are needed.
I do like the girl and your picture. She well pepped. He smile is lovely and she's attractive. The color is pleasant, but as Nill points out, the whites of the eyes and I'd add the teeth, should be protected or was this intentional?
Kathy, your point about slightly rolled up eyes is at first obviously correct, but immediately following that, I wonder how it would seem with her not looking at us. So yes, this is a good point to look out for. Maybe looking a little lower would even create some more modesty or mystery in the shot.
Asher
A small niggle, Heather, the polishing of the skin does not cover the area above the left eye brow.
This image is difficult to fully appreciate because of the large protection banner. I fully agree with your reticence to expose your image so that it can be readily stolen. I have no doubt that before long we'll have easy traceable tags hidden in the image. For now it's a dilemma. I personally would have no problem cloning over the banner. It would take little time. I agree that devoting myself to the internet for 5 minutes, one could steal many images without such protection.
I myself have inserted my own damaging © statement over a face! This was a picture I planned on using and I was excessively protective. Still the main purpose of the notice is to limit the possibility of the image being called an orphan and so become part of the public domain. For that a small notice at an edge serves that purpose.
Another approach would be to only provide a 400 pixel wide image and 100% cutouts if requested. Certainly, when an image is used to demonstrate the value of a lens or camera, 100% cutouts are needed.