Very neat technique. I would love to see it on flowers, still object.
This is a discussion on Ever seen a blue person? within the Critiques forums, part of the Photography & Fine art photography category; Very neat technique. I would love to see it on flowers, still object....
Very neat technique. I would love to see it on flowers, still object.
My new blog as of Nov/10
http://katchickloski.wordpress.com/
For me the first one is the best. I would stay away from the glamor glow.
www.steelcityphotography.com
My mistake has been seeking new landscapes. I should have been seeking new light.
I agree w/scorpio on this. Glamour glow for glamour shots and this is not glamour. The glow detracts from the 'creepiness' quality which helps make this shot imo.
- Please connect with me further
Photo tours of Montreal - Private photography courses
- Join the new Photography.ca Facebook page
- Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/markokulik
- Follow me on Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/0/111159185852360398018/posts
- Check out the photography podcast
"You have to milk the cow quite a lot, and get plenty of milk to get a little cheese." Henri Cartier-Bresson from The Decisive Moment.
I definitely like the original more. The glamour shot makes it look like you are trying to make it into something it's not.
The originals lighting kept me guessing on the light source. The glamour one makes it look less like an interesting experiment, and more like an accident. My guess of the light source was way off by the way . I had pictured some kind of underwater lighting that shined upward through the water. Or light that was bouncing off of water. It felt as though she was sitting pool side or next to a lit fountain.
Last edited by Duane; 05-27-2009 at 10:42 PM.
Cheers guys!
Bookmarks