maybe NSFW, not sure

Trever1t · Feb 22, 2017

I like it, I agree the diagonals above are somewhat distracting but as an environmental shot I think there's a good conveyance of mood.

Dean_Gretsch · Feb 22, 2017

I think the B&W perspective works very well. The background is not distracting to me and works well IMO.

FITBMX · Feb 22, 2017

I really like it, the background doesn't bother me at all. I do wish you would have posted it sooner.

mmaria · Feb 27, 2017

pixmedic said:
my issue with the background (i am including the rail as such because they visually join) is that the top half and the bottom half are pulling in different directions.
it isnt a matter of leading lines, because they dont lead directly to the subject. the railing OR the roof section(?) would have been fine, but together they pull the eyes in all directions.
in a shot like this (and im certainly not an expert so take this as just some idiots opinion) the eye should be led to the model. in this shot though, everything else in the picture leads the eye away from the model, or competes with her for attention.

the B&W conversion is ok. im not really a B&W fan, so I dont really have much advice there.
the pose is excellent. I didnt really see her "scratching" her head as much I saw "running her fingers through her hair", but I can see how either one would be visually applicable.

honestly, we could sit here and debate the backgrounds "distraction" level all day, but the real bit that kills this shot is the OOF "side frames".
everything else, to me anyway, is semantics.

tnx for taking the time

mmaria · Feb 27, 2017

Trever1t said:
I like it, I agree the diagonals above are somewhat distracting but as an environmental shot I think there's a good conveyance of mood.

Dean_Gretsch said:
I think the B&W perspective works very well. The background is not distracting to me and works well IMO.

FITBMX said:
I really like it, the background doesn't bother me at all. I do wish you would have posted it sooner.

thank you guys for taking the time

unpopular · Feb 28, 2017

not sure where you work, but I wouldn't want to pull this one up at the office

Granddad · Feb 28, 2017

unpopular said:
not sure where you work, but I wouldn't want to pull this one up at the office

Unpopular, are you token male in the office of the International Feminist Association or are you the Bishop of Montana?

Seriously, if there's any doubt at all it's best to mark an image as NSFW. Standards and attitudes can vary very widely.

cauzimme · Feb 28, 2017

As a whole I don't think it's working. Lines are too different.
But I do love certain elements.
She does have a fantastic tushie!
I also love the reflection of the floor.
And I love the lines of the ceiling.

unpopular · Feb 28, 2017

Granddad said:
unpopular said:

not sure where you work, but I wouldn't want to pull this one up at the office

Click to expand...

Unpopular, are you token male in the office of the International Feminist Association or are you the Bishop of Montana?
Seriously, if there's any doubt at all it's best to mark an image as NSFW. Standards and attitudes can vary very widely.

I am a feminist. Though I don't really have a problem with the image at all. Women can be admired without be objectified; in fact the assertion that the female sexuality and depictions of female sexuality can only only serve men is plenty sexist...

So, uhm. What exactly is your point here?

Granddad · Mar 1, 2017

unpopular said:
I am a feminist. Though I don't really have a problem with the image at all. Women can be admired without be objectified; in fact the assertion that the female sexuality and depictions of female sexuality can only only serve men is plenty sexist...

So, uhm. What exactly is your point here?

No point, just trying to be lighthearted, possibly not clear enough.

BTW, I LOVE your phrasing there "Women can be admired without be objectified; in fact the assertion that the female sexuality and depictions of female sexuality can only only serve men is plenty sexist."