Yang.

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

2 words pop to mind here.
Devon Aoki

I like the feel of the picture. A series might be good.

hmm felt like its 3 words... or more... ;p

anyway, same sentiments, look like her, felt like her, esp the eyes...

but just not my cuppa tea... :sweatsm:

and err.. i thought ppl say, portrait must have sharp eyes, i dun see anything sharp here...

 

[StreetShooter]

I like this.

"Backstage" is probably an attempt to recreate this shot, but it doesn't work. This one does. Why?

1. A young child is more fragile and vulnerable than a young adult. This itself is appealing. The fact that the young child is all made up implies a certain loss of innocence. The young adult all made up simply looks (excuse the expression, I know you'll understand) sluttish. A world of difference between the two.

2. The expressions are totally different. This vulnerable young child, even with her loss of innocence, has a certain defiant look, with the chin uplifted and gazing straight into the camera. This is very arresting. The pictures in "Backstage" are pretty expressionless, or trying to portray expressions too subtle for me. Mostly the model looks bored (yes, I realize this may be what is trying to be portrayed, but it's not an INTERESTING expression - who enjoys looking at bored people?).

3. Technically, the softness and movement blur in "Yang" works very well, creating a certain melancholic dreaminess, together with the fact that the colours look slightly desaturated. The harshness and sharpness and bright skin colours (let me guess, you were using a Sony digicam?) of "Backstage" simply reflects reality all too well. Most of us like to escape from reality.

4. It does not look like flash was used for "Yang". The harshness of the sharp-edged flash shadow in "Backstage" works against it. Very distracting.

In the end, it's the expression. Does not matter about movement blur, softness, top of head cut off.

 

[melodyyap]

I second that.

I actually LIKE it. Sure it has flaws. But it have depth, expression to die for and combine with it's colour and the slight bur. I see a very surreal picture and yet very true to the moment. So I LIKE it:thumbsup:

I third that. :bsmilie:

I like this picture as well, Zemotion.

And you've got pretty good skills when it comes to eye makeup huh? :thumbsup:

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

I like this.

"Backstage" is probably an attempt to recreate this shot, but it doesn't work. This one does. Why?

1. A young child is more fragile and vulnerable than a young adult. This itself is appealing. The fact that the young child is all made up implies a certain loss of innocence. The young adult all made up simply looks (excuse the expression, I know you'll understand) sluttish. A world of difference between the two.

2. The expressions are totally different. This vulnerable young child, even with her loss of innocence, has a certain defiant look, with the chin uplifted and gazing straight into the camera. This is very arresting. The pictures in "Backstage" are pretty expressionless, or trying to portray expressions too subtle for me. Mostly the model looks bored (yes, I realize this may be what is trying to be portrayed, but it's not an INTERESTING expression - who enjoys looking at bored people?).

3. Technically, the softness and movement blur in "Yang" works very well, creating a certain melancholic dreaminess, together with the fact that the colours look slightly desaturated. The harshness and sharpness and bright skin colours (let me guess, you were using a Sony digicam?) of "Backstage" simply reflects reality all too well. Most of us like to escape from reality.

4. It does not look like flash was used for "Yang". The harshness of the sharp-edged flash shadow in "Backstage" works against it. Very distracting.

In the end, it's the expression. Does not matter about movement blur, softness, top of head cut off.

sorry, pardon my ignorance, but does all portraits shooter before a shot like this do such intense analysis to justify its shot or they just find the shot that looks best and then write a story to justify its purpose?

btw, its just my curiosity at work, pardon me if i offended anyone.

 

[StreetShooter]

I don't know if she deliberately went through all that before she took the shot. My bet is that she didn't. It's called serendipity.

I'm just saying why I like the shot.

For me (and I've been through this before), I take shots and later decide which ones I like. Then I analyse why I like the shots I like, so that, hopefully, in future, I can take more of those kinds of shots.

Any photographer who says he knows exactly the kind of shot he is going to take is either at the top of his profession or lying. And of course he would only need one negative.

 

[mattlock]

I don't know if she deliberately went through all that before she took the shot. My bet is that she didn't. It's called serendipity.

I'm just saying why I like the shot.

For me (and I've been through this before), I take shots and later decide which ones I like. Then I analyse why I like the shots I like, so that, hopefully, in future, I can take more of those kinds of shots.

Any photographer who says he knows exactly the kind of shot he is going to take is either at the top of his profession or lying. And of course he would only need one negative.

just to add on to what streetshooter said
many of my best pictures come from snapshots and random moments and accidents. personally, I then think about why I like that image and then explore the idea further, and then I hone that instinct so that I know what I am looking for when I take a picture.

This is how you develop your style.
which is also why I am asking zemotion what she is looking for in a picture. the two threads you posted are worlds apart.

You do alot of self portraits, which is very good because it's the best way to figure out how you see your world. So I'm not asking you if you were trying to capture the makeup (or anything technical like that), I'm asking if you see yourself as some sort of dreamy surreal childlike goddess, or are you a in-your-face, slightly insecure sort of person
And if you aren't thinking about these issues, then you really should!
All other technical issues can come later.

Depending on how you answer this question, I can then tell you whether this picture is utter bulls-hit or is genius.

anyway yes I had a shoot this morning but I came back from Paul Oakenfold close to 5......I'm dying now.

 

[alvintangz]

image looks great and it works for me.
i can the series forming up together nicely with the other images from your previous post.

 

[AngelZhou]

The picture does not work for me. Something that make me 0_o then "huh?" -_-

Keep try anyway =)

 

[zemotion]

Max 2.8: certainly has. not much excuses, but with flash was ugly, so i went ahead without it.

zhang3feng: ^^;~~

Moxy: thanks. this picture is actually my sister, i didn't want to mention it because i thought it's rather obvious that i'm too young to look 6. haha. well i hope to model if i can, but i prefer to do the photography because i think i'm more of an artist who want to execute the idea than a client who want to try find someone to do up my visions.

well, not exactly practiced artist, but you get the idea.

Del_CtrlnoAlt: it has to do with the camera shake, agree that eyes should be sharper, but i think it evokes a different kind of feeling to the image, no?

 

[zemotion]

I like this.

"Backstage" is probably an attempt to recreate this shot, but it doesn't work. This one does. Why?

1. A young child is more fragile and vulnerable than a young adult. This itself is appealing. The fact that the young child is all made up implies a certain loss of innocence. The young adult all made up simply looks (excuse the expression, I know you'll understand) sluttish. A world of difference between the two.

2. The expressions are totally different. This vulnerable young child, even with her loss of innocence, has a certain defiant look, with the chin uplifted and gazing straight into the camera. This is very arresting. The pictures in "Backstage" are pretty expressionless, or trying to portray expressions too subtle for me. Mostly the model looks bored (yes, I realize this may be what is trying to be portrayed, but it's not an INTERESTING expression - who enjoys looking at bored people?).

3. Technically, the softness and movement blur in "Yang" works very well, creating a certain melancholic dreaminess, together with the fact that the colours look slightly desaturated. The harshness and sharpness and bright skin colours (let me guess, you were using a Sony digicam?) of "Backstage" simply reflects reality all too well. Most of us like to escape from reality.

4. It does not look like flash was used for "Yang". The harshness of the sharp-edged flash shadow in "Backstage" works against it. Very distracting.

In the end, it's the expression. Does not matter about movement blur, softness, top of head cut off.

thank you.

Backstage wasn't exactly an attempt to recreate this, the main objective that day was to test some new makeup colors, snap some shots to prepare and plan for a shoot, and since i was gonna take a number, so i might as well try to do a small set. put together, process it and posted in a manner slightly different from where i was headed off because the image quality was too noisy and pixilated to be good enough for beauty shots. (i know some people complain asians can't do beauty shots, but i was just testing the colors, alright)

yeah, i do agree the poses are boring for backstage, i must have been flipping too many boring spreads lately.

this one was a fujifilm f700 i think, didn't use flash because it was really ugly.

style have changed a little, i must say. but end of the day change's the constant, must continue to do so, and slowly find the distinct direction :bsmilie:

 

[zemotion]

sorry, pardon my ignorance, but does all portraits shooter before a shot like this do such intense analysis to justify its shot or they just find the shot that looks best and then write a story to justify its purpose?

btw, its just my curiosity at work, pardon me if i offended anyone.

i shoot a couple to alot of shots, and then decide which one's nice, or i'd process. not pro enough to just take one shot and yeah. got it.
happens, but of course not everyday. hahaha.

 

[zemotion]

The picture does not work for me. Something that make me 0_o then "huh?" -_-

Keep try anyway =)

hm. ok. hahahaha, i guess it's this thing if someone knows you. among the people who know me, that's like the standard response for this shot. =.=''

 

[rayshade]

There seems to be a contrast of a two fold here, an older soul in her by her pose and the innocence of a child. This irony works for me personally. Nice stuff.

 

[Discreet]

I would say the picture would indeed be better if the sharpness and exposure is better because there is no reason why this picture should not be sharp. You might say this is a snapshot photo... but you applied make-up on your model... so not really a snapshot anyway... it is a prepared shot. On a serious note, i think the next time you shot something funky and alternative like this... why dont you try shooting both a more progressive style and a more conversative style and post both picture up for discussion? This will be really interesting as it throws out of the window any doubts people have on your ability to take good photos and not think you are simply just taking a random photo and PSed it to make it look alternative.

Anyway, it is good to try out new grounds like this.. I must admit that I am more on the conservation side of photography, I will almost always trash a photo unless it meets my minimum standard of a technique (ie sharpness and exposure). Remember, PS will only make a good photo better... it will not make a bad photo good... and in this case, only serves to highlight how the photo was not properly taken

not exactly pulled out randomly. i do agree on that it will be nice with a series, but i don't think it very weak as a stand alone.

i mentioned that i took this a while ago because it relates a little to a thread that i posted just some days back, and decided to post it up along.

the sharpness and focus of a picture is subjective, i did hope that it could have been sharper, but sometimes low end consumer cameras just have a little bit of limits as compared to what i can get if i'd used something else. so is this a good photo if the sharpness and exposures are better?

(sorry about the low quality compression)

 

[AngelZhou]

I like this pix =)

ah, i find that sometimes you 'chin up' a little bit too much actually in this particular pix.

as for my reply - it's gonna be the same wether i know you or not. Rest assure that :bsmilie:

 

[Quiksilvers]

Well photography is art, and art is not precise. so, some likes it, some hates it.

How can I hurt the model's feeling by saying "you are not pissing off the model?" Anyway, what are you trying to say with this picture?

To be very frank, I see an image gone totally south and suddenly, an idea pop up ... I have this picture that can fit into this catagory ...

Sorry if I hurt your feelings, I am told to be nicer, but this picture really sucks.

actually, seriously, u suck (alot) more i think alot of us agree

 

[Stereobox]

Personally, I dont understand the picture. As a picture as opposed to be a part of a SERIES of picture, it is weak and lack focus. This is obviously not an orthodox photo and has many "flaws" (compared to the standard sharp correctly exposed photos) and I am staring at it wondering what this picture is trying to say. Maybe I am just not getting it, but personally this seems to be a photo that seems to be something that was pulled out randomly and PSed to get an "alternative" look which of course is very subjective. You mentioned that you did indeed took this photo a while ago and I am guessing when you took that photo you did not expect it to turn out the way it is now.

Anyway, these kind of photos cannot stand alone.. you need a series of photos to actually bring across what you are trying to show... and maybe you can explain yourself clearly.

Right now, I just see a bad photo that is PSed to look alternative

my 2 cents

you see it as a photo randomly pulled out and postprocessed to get an alternative look.

i see it as a re-interpretation of the original 'negative', a current reflection of her state of mind and being, and photographic sensibility.

the expression however, remains priceless.

 

[Ashleyy]

I like it!! :lovegrin:

On first look, it's seems wrong somehow.. following the norms, there will be a lot of wrongness in it. But the expression and the style does invoke a strong feeling!

Well, not all photos are meant to juz look nice, makes u feel good. Some makes u feel angry, so sad.. This one is good!

Hopefully some day I can do something with as much feel as this! :thumbsup:

 

[mattlock]

does anyone find this image bad?and does anyone see the similarities?

 

[Discreet]

you see it as a photo randomly pulled out and postprocessed to get an alternative look.

i see it as a re-interpretation of the original 'negative', a current reflection of her state of mind and being, and photographic sensibility.

the expression however, remains priceless.

Makes sense too, everyone is entitled to his of her opinion.

As for the expression, I really dont know what to make up of it.