fourg1b2006 Loc: Long Island New York

I think you came up with some beauties.

cigar dude Loc: South Central MA

I am a fan of B&W photography and I think Yousuf Karsha and George Hurell where great portrait photographers creating a Hollywood style that is timeless. When veiwing the black and white photo I seen a Hollywood style in your photograph and the model. The only thought I had was the photograph was stylish, theatrical and well done. Keep up exploring my friend. I think you are on to something.

Glenn Harve

Ha, i meant for post processing of pics!

Mr Bill 2011 Loc: southern Indiana

I remember, as a child in the 50s, seeing a multi-page spread in Life Magazine [or perhaps Look] of captured color photos taken in Germany during Hitler's reign; included were photos of lampshades and wallets made from tattooed human skin. I promised myself right then that I would never have a tattoo. No gold teeth either! Better safe than sorry.

hasslichhog

[quote=canadaboy]The tats are so overwhelmingly awful its not easy to look beyond them."

That anyone would purposely make such a beautiful body element like skin dirty, filthy, foul and nasty with tattoos should see a psychiatrist.

sbohne

Image 1: camera angle too low; you did her no favors by allowing the light to hit her tummy and it makes it look large than it is. If the dress is that tight and the tummy that protuberant, ask her to pull it in for the exposure. The dress is very wrinkled and distracting. #2: MUCH better, great pose, lousy light. Ask yourself, "What is most important?" I don't know what your answer would be, but it's definitely NOT your subject. Squint your eyes...now what is the brightest thing in the image? That is where the viewer's attention will go...and it's NOT your subject. #3: Ditto. #4: Really bad light and/or exposure. #5: Really close here, but the arm cutting across her body is not attractive. Also, don't point any limb towards the lens, eg her right arm...it causes foreshortening. Not desirable. #6: Nice pose, but what's the brightest thing in the image? It's not her face. #7: Let's not talk about this, except to say there's direction of light on the wall behind her, but not on her face. #8: take that gawd-awful distracting cage out of the image and it's one of your best. #9: It's cute. The tilting tree top is a little distracting, but it's a very good portfolio type image. #10: Never show the back of the hand, especially on women. Head and body in same direction = static pose. Camera angle too low. But you have given very nice motion to her torso by the tilt of her shoulders. I hope this gives you something to build on. Keep at it.

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

OK folks let's step back for a moment. I appreciate the constructive advice all have given. Thank you all for taking the time to help guide me. I appreciate your feedback and will take the photographic aspect to heart. As far as the model, she was fun and easy to work with, making the task at hand a lot easier. But it is what it is. I passed no judgment because of her tats.

Was it somewhat of a distraction? Yes, but I looked past that because she was such a wonderful subject. I'm 61 and have a few tats myself to honor my wife stricken with stage 4 cancer. I don't know my subjects story on her ink, and I didn't ask. I worked with what I had to work with and was happy for that opportunity. Some people find that much ink desireable, some not. But it's not for me to judge. My focus was on the technical aspect and feel more comfortable working with a model. I think I succeeded at both to some degree.

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

Thank you for your kind words. I grew up processing and printing in B&W in the 70's and still love the effect. Some shots just scream to be processed in B&W. That was one of them.

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

Thank you. Personally, I am very pleased with my first attempt. I just wanted to see what those with more experience had to say.

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

Thank you for your thoughts. I only had an hour with the model and the ambient light was all I had to work with. If I had my druthers, I'd druther have had some soft light boxes and key lights to enhance and eliminate shadows. I realized they were going to be an issue, so rather than fight them, I tried to work with them and soften as best I could.

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

Thank you. Valid point. I will keep that in mind when I shoot some senior pictures for a friend of mine this spring. I was using a 105mm Tamron f1.4
but my AF choices apparently were not the best. I was using a group AF, instead of maybe a single point?

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

Thank you kindly ! I'm not a pro either !

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

Unfortunately, I did not have much choice in the background. it was a early 1900's factory turned into a "studio" Brick walls were the backdrop of the day.

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

No you can't. She couldn't have been nicer and accomodating. And she was some kind of top kick boxer in Cleveland, so I would have been afraid to say anything anyway. ;-)

christographer Loc: Cleveland, OH

You know, I had that chance and I totally blew it. Never gave it a second thought. There were white rings with reflective material all over the place. Grrrr