2nefoto

Having survived the opinions relative to my first post, I offer a second. As with the first, I welcome commentary

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

Always turn the camera 45 degrees. That is mandatory to be considered creative in 2023.

Tomfl101 Loc: Mount Airy, MD

Much better. Good light in the eyes, smooth skin, soft light. The whites of the eyes look a little over retouched to me however.

2nefoto

Again..your comments are profoundly appreciated.
Thank you

2nefoto

45° in 2023 to be considered creative is an interesting perspective. I chose the diagonal perspective to draw more attention to her eyes. Finally, the photo wasn't taken in 2023, Does that eliminate its creative possibilities?

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Good lighting, clarity and sharpness. The outline of the whites of the eyes looks a bit distorted.

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

How can it be considered creative when everyone with a phone does it every time?

I was on one of those Facebook "Photoshop editing" groups, you know, where they all use Remini to "photoshop" stuff, and a photographer asked if someone could fix some pictures she took where there was massive flare that washed out the image. Her client was expecting them and this was all she had. I of course offended her when I told her that pointing her camera into the sun, which is oh, so trendy nowadays, was going to this every time. I was informed that this was the modern way, that I was an old codger who should just step aside and let the kids take over and innovate.

I sure hope her client liked the great (blown out) modern images with the Remini faces...

bikinkawboy Loc: north central Missouri

I’m certainly no expert, so take what I say with a grain of salt. First off, to me a very captivating image that immediately draws your attention to her eyes. In fact, I cannot look at it without immediately going for the eyes. Fortunately hers aren’t as bloodshot as mine...

Were I to do it, I probably would have toned down the contrast just a bit, but that’s just my opinion which means little or nothing. Maybe I’m used to seeing the world through 66 year old eyes that ain’t what they used to be. Did you sharpen the image much? Your model looks great, but under more ordinary conditions the sharpness would probably make any complexion flaws more noticeable and you know how vain some people can be.

I like what you did. Other people may not but that’s not important. What is important is what you and your model think of it. Heck, some people consider Jackson Pollak’s splattering and splashing to be art although I don’t. What you did is no doubt better than what most people, myself included, could do. So keep on chugging!

2nefoto

The light source was three feet from the model. A forty eight inch white interior umbrella gave the skin softness. Lens nikkor 80-200mm 2.8
ISO 100/ f 5.6/250
Camera Nikon D800e
Calumet 1500ws lights @1/4 power

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

This beautiful transfixing shot is useful for hypnosis ... the two eyes and lips multiple times on blank space may tell all the story we need...

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Kids today are in to science - they don't have much time for creative arts! Perhaps because they are no good at it!

2nefoto

I appreciate your view
Thank you

autofocus Loc: North Central Connecticut

Certainly better all around. I agree with RG above that the whites of her eyes are a little overworked, at least for my taste. The skin softening is nicely done, and probably takes 15 years off the subject. The good news about that is many women will like that, but you could run into some who would say, "nice, but it doesn't look like me." If you were doing this for a paid customer it's always good to ask about how much retouching they'd want. We once shot a young woman who was left with a nasty scar on her face after a serious accident, and I asked her if she wanted me to remove it in editing? She said no, it's how I look today. The more fullness of her lips is a plus. Now, overall, a nice job on her face, but you seemed to neglect the rest of her, as in her body. Her face nicely had the corrective work done, but a few spots and marks on her body also should have been removed. And one final note, and your shot angle kind of forgives this some, but it's never good to crop a head at the hairline...it's one of those no no's like cropping at joints. Curious, did you use one of the prepackaged programs available today to do this, or was everything done in individual steps in Photoshop, or the editing tool you use?

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Forgetting the tech for a moment, I see a pretty girl in an ugly picture.

williejoha

A very good shot. To me it looks like the sharpest point in the picture are her lips. Was the focus point the lips? Just wondering.
WJH