Ok, Take '3'.... (Not work safe at all)

Moscovite · Oct 16, 2006

Ok, I took advice of one of the members here (you know who you are, THANKS :hail: ), and played around with this photo, fixed the horizon, the B&W intensity. I know the face is shaded, but there's nothing I could do about it without distorting the image, next time I will use a reflector (if there's any blood left in my brain to remember...) This image is a bit graphic, but nobody complained when I posted the original, so here's the 'fixed' version. Sorry if it is over the top for anyone, but my fiance and I want to know how we can improve these sorts of photos. Thanks! (posted a link instead of an image to comply)

http://i4.ebayimg.com/04/i/08/ae/32/12_10.JPG

Jeepnut28 · Oct 16, 2006

i think the fact that you can so plainly see her genitals really takes away from the beauty of the rest of her body......dont get my wrong, i think she has great genitals

, but it would be a better "art" pic if you had taken the shot a little straighter on.....

cheers to you though, I have been wanting to shoot some nudes myself my GF nixes that idea everytime i ask

Moscovite · Oct 16, 2006

That's too bad about your GF, I think a woman's body is a wonderland... Hell, you don't even have to be a good photog to capture it successfully. Not all pics we take are this graphic, but I really like this one

mysteryscribe · Oct 16, 2006

What bothers me is not her body parts or lack of body parts. The picture, to me, looks over processed. It looks past what one would expect to see in real life. Drama in a real enviornment is one thing, but photoshop drama just looks like photoshop drama.

I liked the original, more or less, camera model better. Just my opinion Im sure

Moscovite · Oct 16, 2006

Thanks Mystery! I like the original because of the softer skin-tone and a more natural look, but I thought I'd toy with a B&W...

Alex_B · Oct 16, 2006

sorry to reply that late!

I think you went in the right direction with your postprocessing, but maybe just one slight inch too far. It is sometimes just a little bit too much which makes things look overdone.

But unlike mysteryscribe I still like that processed version better than the original (which was not bad by no means!) .. just if you reduce the processing just slightly you might get a picture which pleases almost everyone

but then again you are not supposed to please everyone. pleasing everyone is impossible anyway, so first of all you should please yourself (not shure whom I am citing here)

Keep experimenting!

Big Mike · Oct 16, 2006

I've said it before...but you are quite the lucky guy to have such a beautiful model to work with.

I agree with what Jeepnut is saying. There is too much attention drawn to the genitals. I think is is partially due to the fact that her face is too dark. Her legs and rear are the brightest spots, which naturally draw the eye's attention. If her face was bright as well, it may have been more balanced.

I'm no expert on posing nudes...so take this for what it's worth. I think the pose is a little awkward. She is leaning a little forward from the knees..which is causing her glutes to flex and not maintain their round shape. Her elbow also is locked, which scrunches up the skin.

She is kind of doing this, but it usually seems to help when the model arches her back. This accentuates the curves and can give them a great 'S' curve to the body...which usually looks really good.

Moscovite · Oct 16, 2006

Great pointers, Mike! (and Thanks!) On the original the face was more noticeable, so it worked better. We'll try a similar pose, but with those slight changes and see what happens!

Moscovite · Oct 17, 2006

Hey, i meant to ask: is it better to set your camera to B&W or to make changes in softwares such as PS?

MichaelMigz · Oct 17, 2006

change the in software. that way, you can work work with the color one as well! plus, you get more options when adjusitng to BW in a program.

Moscovite · Oct 18, 2006

It seems, though, that whenever I take a B&W pic with a camera it always comes out crispier and, um, truer, if that makes any sense. When I edit it in the software, you can sorta tell that it was edited. Don't ask me how!

Big Mike · Oct 18, 2006

Then your conversion to B&W needs work. Try a search for B&W conversion...you should get a few hits here and quite a few on Google.

What is your technique now?

Moscovite · Oct 18, 2006

You're gonna laugh... I use Picasa to convert to B&W, and then I sharpen the image some.

Big Mike · Oct 18, 2006

Do you have anything better than Picasa? I have it one of my computers...but I've never used it for editing.

Photoshop is best but it's expensive. Photoshop elements is cheaper and works very well for photos. Gimp is free and supposed to be pretty good, but I've never used it.