Michelle - in a happy mood

[ParkertR]

hmmm :sweat: lighting is good but cleavage is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :X

 

[smallaperture]

what are you trying to achieve with this image?

Dunno leh. Just hold cam, aim and fire off. Just like that la.

Some people call it Fortuitous. :bsmilie:

 

[BlueBull]

:think:

very distracting image........:sweat:

 

[Hommie]

If this is offending, then, I better not post some other shots in another session with her. Not sure if get censored by our Moderators. So better practice self-censoring. :bsmilie:

Darn! :bsmilie:

 

[glensky]

:angel: we want to see more of this happy moments kekekekeke

 

[24bits]

If this is offending, then, I better not post some other shots in another session with her. Not sure if get censored by our Moderators. So better practice self-censoring. :bsmilie:

eh ... whats wrong with the photo ? would like to see how the model can be capture in other ways ... i feel should add more mood to the shot ...

 

[smallaperture]

Well, IMO, there is nothing so offending about it. If you look inside FHM or Maxim, it is much more revealing and much more skin shown.

In any case, I took a few more pics - many are simply not up to standard to show and some of them are genuinely offending to some, enticing to others. Learnt quite a few things from the book "Lighting the Nude". Also, Michelle may not wish to let me post her other pics here.

Maybe, I should turn the pic into B&W. How about that?

 

[lemontree]

woah! :bigeyes: okay end of first comment...

second comment...I think the lighting doesn't complement her, especially her face, very well. :sweat:

 

[student]

Kindly refer to your comments in the thread by Bobman regarding "offending/offensive".

First of all, I do not think your image of Michelle is "offensive" at all. Different people have different sensitivities, and I think it is important to remember this.

Regarding your image, I do not think the issue is an issue of light. It is the entire image that prompted Kagetsuki to make his comment. Much nakedness and sensuality and eroticism can be made with sensitivity. It is just that the image appears to tantalize. The way she smiles, her dress, her posture etc.

And regarding Bobman's image. That image is a straight forward nude structure. Even if the breast is shown completely, there is absolutely no hint of the model trying to tantalise anyone. That was a study in forms and shapes, devoid of the personality of the model. In your picture, the personality of Michelle was shown in her entirety. And she appears to be trying to say something. Or at least you made her as if she was trying to say something.

Changing Michelle's image from color to B&W does not make a difference at all. It is the execution and what you are trying to portray that matters.

Give some thoughts to that.

 

[smallaperture]

Many thanks Student for the in-depth analysis of it. For me, this is just play-play anyhow shoot-shoot lah. It is genuinely fortuitous that it turned out this way.

And maybe, me just somewhat shallow leh. Dunno much about those chim views. Hehehe.....

And it is good to be a student, and we can all learn something from each other in this forum. Still learning after all these years.

 

[student]

Many thanks Student for the in-depth analysis of it. For me, this is just play-play anyhow shoot-shoot lah. This is genuinely fortuitous that it turned out this way.

Playing is fun! Definitely! And we would do ourselves a lot of good to be able to laugh at ourselves!

But when an image turns out in a certain way, then it would be good to analyse and reflect why it elicits certain type of responses from viewers.

 

[smallaperture]

This reminds me of an essay topic given by my professor:

Sexual Intrepretation of a Phenomenon or Intrepretation of a Sexual Phenomenon. :think: :sweat:

 

[student]

This reminds me of an essay topic given by my professor:

Sexual Intrepretation of a Phenomenon or Intrepretation of a Sexual Phenomenon. :think: :sweat:

That is quite definitely beyond me!! :bigeyes:

 

[TECH]

Changing Michelle's image from color to B&W does not make a difference at all. It is the execution and what you are trying to portray that matters.

issizt?

 

[TECH]

eh will take it down if smallaperture has objections ...

 

[Jemapela]

I also cannot see how this image can be described as offensive. I certainly don't think it is. No private parts were shown and it doesn't explicitly suggest sex.

I agree with those who said that if this image was offensive, then FHM/Maxim magazines would be worse. Then, the bikini-clad girls parading and frolicking at Senstosa can also be deemed as offensive.

In all the time I've spent doing portraits or posed women, almost everytime when there's a slight revealing of deep cleavage or ample breasts, the typical Asian female spectators' response is one of offence. It's as if deep cleavage or ample bosoms leans towards porn or the woman subject is cheap. It's like some stereotype many Asian women hold in their minds.

I've been given more than the weird look by Asian (especially S'porean) women for the kind of images I shoot. No wonder I have been kicked in the groin so often and told to bugger off.

I would have thought the sale of FHM/Maxim and the plethora of Triumph and Wacoal billboard ads in S'pore would have by now open more minds. Looks like it's still a long long way to go.

 

[bwilly]

Well, this time, got Michelle in a happy mood. This time, it ain't a test shot - trying to take a real picture. Critiques/comments welcomed.

Goodness me.. who is michelle.
The shot looks ordinary though there's potential to be explored.

1) slight distraction on the left lower corner.
2) mischevious look, but with the hand covering across the bosom?
3) white background, pretty boring.
4) shots with the other hand also showing, fuller shot half body shot (ie, more of Michelle right shoulder)

 

[smallaperture]

eh will take it down if smallaperture has objections ...

No problem to have done B&W faster than me. Except that it is now far too contrasty such that half the face is black. I will see if I can do a little better using the original jpeg file.

 

[smallaperture]

Goodness me.. who is michelle.
The shot looks ordinary though there's potential to be explored.

1) slight distraction on the left lower corner.
2) mischevious look, but with the hand covering across the bosom?
3) white background, pretty boring.
4) shots with the other hand also showing, fuller shot half body shot (ie, more of Michelle right shoulder)

Thanks bwilly for the constructive critique. IMO, talking about bosom, cleavage or offensiveness is at the threshold of OT already.

Well, just the same, at least, I realise that we are still so very conservative or at least one sector of us here. Although Playboy and Penthouse haven't arrived here, we still have the likes of FHM and Maxim whose pictures are there to tantalise as their primary objective. And lately, I have been seeing huge poster of a topless woman in an advert for Triumph in departmental stores. Maybe, our society is very diversified, but sure and certainly we are tending towards more liberal as we are seeing movies and even theatres having less cut by the censors.

BTW, Michelle chose this particular dress she wished to pose with. And most of the poses were her ideas, mostly seen from pictures in magazines. I just arranged the lights and compose and shoot.

 

[reno77]

The flash was set on the floor? The shadows on her face are too harsh for the "sensual" look. Usually for women, the lighting ratio is 2:1 between the main light and fill light.