Care for a bite?

[smoke665]

Everything Darrel points out is pretty much on point, as are those by Vintagesnaps, and Designer. In looking back over images you've posted it seems that they tend to be either very good or not so good, with nothing in between. Unfortunately like the others mentioned, I also think this one falls on the low end. I swear that backdrop reminds me of a bed spread I saw somewhere, and as I recall I didn't like it in person either. Your ability deserves another chance at this one, maybe incorporating some of the suggestions above, and rethinking the scene from the ground up.

 

[Gary A.]

Typically, I try not to say anything negative. But I think you are thinking about or have gone pro. So I'll give you my two cents and what I expect from a 'Pro'. (I came to my conclusions prior to reading other comments and I am not 'piling on' with Derrel.

My first impression is the photo is nice ... then I took a second look. She is your model, you have full artistic control ... and this is what you came up with ... To my eye this looks like a five minute mall portrait with prepositioned formula lights, not a custom, formal portrait captured by a professional artist/photographer.

Technically, the lighting is nice, gets the job done with a minimum of effort. But it doesn't say to the viewer "Wow" ... it doesn't say to the viewer "Look at me" ... it doesn't say "I want that photographer to shoot me" ... to the untrained eye it says "Nice". Doughnuts are nice ... look there are 11 more in the box just like the one in your hand. Look, there are a hundred more doughnuts in the shop, just like the one in your hand.

As you are a pro, I am hoping you're not looking to capture "Nice" ... but rather "Wow".

Collectively, all the elements of the photo doesn't make sense to me. The backdrop doesn't make sense to me. Why that backdrop? It is distracting and frankly unattractive. Now, it this backdrop was her design or has some sentimental value to the subject ... okay, I can see that. But other than something along a sentimental element ... why did you use that background? Why that outfit? It appears to be selected and not something young women wear everyday. If selected, why not something more unique, special? After all, this is a formal portrait. While it displays her slim body ... is that necessary? There are outfits which say "I am slim" in a less obvious, more formal and/or sensuous and/or special fashion? While this is an obviously (per the lighting) formal sitting, yet her outfit doesn't say formal, which to me when combined with all the other odd elements, delivers a message stating "contrived". Why that crop/framing? It seems the crop/framing is just to highlight a contrived outfit ... why would you want to do that? An apple, why? I have nothing against props, but nothing in the image explains the apple. Not that an explanation is necessary, but with all the other elements, the apple just adds another contrived oddity.

To my eye, a tight crop below her right elbow and crop in tightly left and right would improve the image.

You are much better than a mall photographer. I understand that it takes time to develop one's style and sense of artistic balance. I suggest you look into a local fashion/design school and team up with a student/intern/extern or two to combine their design skills with your photographic skills.

 

[DGMPhotography]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone.

I ultimately still like the photo, but I understand there are issues with it, and that is something I need to work on. Granted, this was from a shoot from about 4 months ago that I only now posted, and I have gotten better at looking out for details since then, but I know I've still got a ways to go.

I will agree that the photo is "nice," but not "wow." And I do want to get to "wow." I will study the image and try to see things from your point of view.

 

[Gary A.]

PS- Every photo is a story. Everybody has a story. What story did you want to portray? As an example, not knowing the subject, my first instinct would be her hair, all that long red hair ... I'd turn my lighting and camera to the hair.

 

[Ballistics]

In a studio setting where you have almost complete control, you have a lot less room to "break rules" and a much smaller margin of error imho. A lot of the flaws have been pointed out, but one thing that stands out to me is it almost looks as if she is leaning into the camera and the back drop is angled away from it. Also, the wrinkled clothing kills it for me.

This is just a swing and a miss for me. It's not awful, just not something I'd put in my portfolio.

 

[Designer]

PS- Every photo is a story. Everybody has a story. What story did you want to portray? As an example, not knowing the subject, my first instinct would be her hair, all that long red hair ... I'd turn my lighting and camera to the hair.

While some photo sessions are intended to provide the model with a portfolio that she can use to further an acting or modeling career, and such a purpose is entirely valid, even if the model is not being paid at that particular time, but this does not appear to be the objective of this particular shoot.

I agree, that when presented with some physical attribute that is photo-worthy, the photographer would do his best to take advantage of the situation and showcase the model, even if the model had no prior inkling that the shoot would be about her hair, for instance.

A prescient photographer should be able to change gears in the midst of a shoot and figure out a way to highlight the most impressive features, whether it is on a model or a sunset. He might even ask the model to go home and change into something that would fit the intent of the shoot, even it was on the spur of the moment.

This shot seems to be the result of some preconceived idea that the photographer had, and everything in the shot, including the model's attire seems planned for the concept. Me not perceiving the concept could be simply my own failure, but I don't see that anyone else got much out of this shot either.

 

[DGMPhotography]

PS- Every photo is a story. Everybody has a story. What story did you want to portray? As an example, not knowing the subject, my first instinct would be her hair, all that long red hair ... I'd turn my lighting and camera to the hair.

While some photo sessions are intended to provide the model with a portfolio that she can use to further an acting or modeling career, and such a purpose is entirely valid, even if the model is not being paid at that particular time, but this does not appear to be the objective of this particular shoot.

I agree, that when presented with some physical attribute that is photo-worthy, the photographer would do his best to take advantage of the situation and showcase the model, even if the model had no prior inkling that the shoot would be about her hair, for instance.

A prescient photographer should be able to change gears in the midst of a shoot and figure out a way to highlight the most impressive features, whether it is on a model or a sunset. He might even ask the model to go home and change into something that would fit the intent of the shoot, even it was on the spur of the moment.

This shot seems to be the result of some preconceived idea that the photographer had, and everything in the shot, including the model's attire seems planned for the concept. Me not perceiving the concept could be simply my own failure, but I don't see that anyone else got much out of this shot either.

That makes sense. Emphasizing things like that.

I will admit I've always struggled with the "story" aspect of photography. Especially when it comes to studio portraiture.

I'll tell y'all that today, for perhaps the first time (or at least one of the few), I actually did a shoot with a story in mind, and hopefully when that's done, I'll post it here, and you all will agree.