ski
Loc: West Coast, USA
Hit the wrong button.. Continued
ski wrote:
Hit the wrong button.. Continued
The Morticia look fits nicely in the cemetery.
ski wrote:
As the title says..
Many years ago I thought this type of image was neat. However when I got into photography (1955) I had second thoughts, I came to realization that It is Disrespectful to all of the families and the deceased in the cemetery.
And these images are not at flattering to the model, the lighting is way too harsh, especially for a mature woman with black hair.
Don't get me wrong I think this lady is very nice looking, but we all have flaws and your images show hers, instead of minimizing them or it.
Nude and lingerie are some of the most difficult photo to do and have them be tasteful and flattering to the subject
The most important thing is the Lighting, and then the pose, it's what you DON'T see that makes the image interesting and stirs the imagination.
I believe it was the actress Jane Russel that said it not what you show, it's how you show it that keeps men interested, or something along those lines.
ski wrote:
As the title says..
All that ‘stuff’ in the background distracts my attention from the subject….unless, of course, you are trying to sell me tombstones.
Too many times we try to just place two things together without any concept as to what it is we want to achieve; thus making the image just a snap-shot (a record of that place, at that time), not a photograph with some attributes of artistic value or interest. IMO
PaulG
Loc: Western Australia
So much potential in a cemetery for this type of photography. Good idea. But the lighting/angles just aren't working. I'd be interested to know what the idea was here and what you were happy about?
Should be a night at the cemetery. Everyone knows in the heat of the night that's the coolest place.
ski wrote:
Hit the wrong button.. Continued
One other thing you should consider is the names on the tombstone showing, in relatives of the deceased should happen to see these photos you could end up in DEEP S### and maybe charged with Trespass at the minimum.
As with others here, I'm torn with how I feel about this.
ski wrote:
Hit the wrong button.. Continued
Those who love necks are referred to as necrophiles
Yes, some of the tombstones are phallic in apperance. But, the overall 'look' is appropriate and good for those who visually/mentally look deeper into each image.
Could I want to see 'more' in this image or that one? Definitely. Whatever I might do would automatically be different than what almost anyone else would try to do, using the same model/props/lighting, etc. But, that is the charm, the potential and the possibilities of the same 'set up' with the use of 'different eyes'.
The goal we should all strive for is to develop 'different eyes' when we 'pre-visualize' our photo shoot or when doing it. Strive for more. Try a few more shots/angles/poses. Look for the simpler presentation as well as the more specific/detailed or more emotive one. Your "cost" per shot is virtually nil. Take more pictures/make more images. Look for the obvious and the more ambiguous/stretching of boundaries. Push yourself to look for more - more different, more adventurous, more creative. Take risks. Do not miss opportunities to grow and expand. You will 'thank yourself' at some time in the future. (Don't pass up this chance or any other one to grow and stretch you creative wings - no matter what you shoot.)
Alb
Loc: Lehigh Valley area, Pennsylvania
I agree with Manglesphoto and Rab-Eye.
A cemetery is, in its truest sense, a sacred space for the eternal rest of the departed.
I’m not a fuddy-duddy at all, but the whole photo shoot leaves me uncomfortable.
I also live near Amish country, and I won’t take photos of the Amish because it’s disrespectful of their wishes.
Just some thoughts.
I've gotta run with the pack on this one.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.