The Body Project (:

[Vautrin]

Thanks for your critique buttt..
a)These aren't beauty shots, it's an exploration of the body, so that includes skin blemishes.b)I agree with the material: bed, but I took all of them in her very crowded dorm, and to make matters worse her bed was a bunk bed. If there was another clear wall in her room I would've done it on the floor, but even so, there are things EVERYWHERE and I just couldn't compromise time at the moment. :thumbup:

IMHO little things create a distracting shot, and they keep good shots from being great shots. Personally, I'd like to see a shoot of the body emphasizing the curves of the female form, and little things can take away from the effect of the overall image.

This one is a great example.

The pose to me is interesting. But the acne on her chest is distracting, and her bra doesn't fit right creating a shadow. Personally I would have liked to have seen this shot without acne and either without the bra, or with a well fitting bra (maybe a bikini top?). And maybe have her bend her head forward or backwards depending on effect -- I think it would make the shot a much better shot.

One of the things that always amazes me about professional shoots about how they control everything -- every minor detail. Of course that's just my opinion and how I would have shot it -- love it or hate it...

c)I think of the face as a whole other 'world' than the body, and it's not that I was hiding her identity, I did take some with her face included but I didn't like them on the contact sheet and they didn't fit in as cohesive prints, imo.

Well, again IMHO, I would have liked shots that weren't cropped so closely. I'm not necessarily saying you should have shot portraits, but for instance in this shot I think I either would have cropped right to her midriff so you get just the curves of her stomach and chest -- or included the rest of her legs and added it to the shot...

Also, you can shoot her with her head tilted back or forward so you don't see her face -- but I think it adds more humanity to the pose... Does that make sense?

 

[Vautrin]

For instance in this shot you have a picture of a foot. And its a well done picture of a foot, there's a nice contrast between shadow and light, and the image is sharp. But, well, it's a foot and I don't think I'd hang a picture of a foot on my wall, no matter how good.

That's your opinion, are you saying only the amazing pictures are hung up on walls (in people's houses, I assume)? I don't mean to come off as defensive, but wow. I don't think you read the description of the whole project, and that image was chosen for my final portfolio because it's not only a foot, it has leg too. Before I clicked the link, I was sure you were thinking of the leg section of the extension. I'm sorry my photos won't make it up on your wall, but they weren't taken for that intention, so it's fine. :thumbup::lmao:
I've seen some pretty boring sh!t up in people's houses, so even then, I still have a shot. [:

I actually did read the description of your project. And I understand that you were shooting body parts, and hands, feet, all of those are connected to the body. However you asked for C&C, and what I was nicely trying to say is that even though you may have done a great job in terms of the assignment (capturing the human body), a lot of the criticism for your shots focuses on the fact that they're bland.

A picture of a foot in the air -- even attached to a leg -- isn't particularly interesting. Yes, it fulfills the purpose of your assignment, and you got an A, but I would have been more interested to see, for instance, feet with the girl on tip toes, or a more striking pose. And I think others would agree with that here.

Let me put it another way. When I first got my camera, to try to understand depth of field, I put a bunch of beer bottles in a row, and took a series of shots starting at f 2.8 all the way through f 22. Personally, I achieved my purposed of trying to understand DOF and how the different f stop values effect it. However, I don't think many people here would find the subject matter interesting...

And I think it's a valid critique -- yes you took pictures of all the different body parts but none of these pictures screams to me "everyday object from a different really cool looking perspective"

 

[Sbuxo]

@Vautrin: I do appreciate your critique, and you're right about the distracting items and such in Body I, which was the first print I made. The project started in the beginning of the semester on January 6, and ended April 15th.
I'll probably do a more contemporary nude next semester if there's a better setting.
:thumbup:

 

[Vautrin]

@Vautrin: I do appreciate your critique, and you're right about the distracting items and such in Body I, which was the first print I made. The project started in the beginning of the semester on January 6, and ended April 15th.
I'll probably do a more contemporary nude next semester if there's a better setting.
:thumbup:

Why wait? If nudes or similar artsy poses interests you, then don't wait for a school project to shoot it, just shoot shoot shoot.

If they don't interest you, go grab your camera and shoot what does interest you... Be creative, be daring, burn through some film to try new things... Look at other people's photos and artwork and be inspired (but always be original)

Don't shoot something because you have to for a school project, do so because it's interesting, because it's fun, and because you enjoy it. And if you ever stop enjoying it, take a break go find something else for a little while...

By the way -- criticism aside I think you did a good job...:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

 

[Sbuxo]

@Vautrin: I do appreciate your critique, and you're right about the distracting items and such in Body I, which was the first print I made. The project started in the beginning of the semester on January 6, and ended April 15th.
I'll probably do a more contemporary nude next semester if there's a better setting.
:thumbup:

Why wait? If nudes or similar artsy poses interests you, then don't wait for a school project to shoot it, just shoot shoot shoot.

If they don't interest you, go grab your camera and shoot what does interest you... Be creative, be daring, burn through some film to try new things... Look at other people's photos and artwork and be inspired (but always be original)

Don't shoot something because you have to for a school project, do so because it's interesting, because it's fun, and because you enjoy it. And if you ever stop enjoying it, take a break go find something else for a little while...

By the way -- criticism aside I think you did a good job...:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

:lmao: The reason I have to wait til next semester is because it's the only free access I'll have to a darkroom 24/7. I'm majoring in photography, soo..yeah.

 

[molested_cow]

I've never shot nudes before, but I've done plenty of nude figure drawings.

Before I lay my pencil down on the paper, I look for the gesture in the figure. It's really abstract here. Basically, it's the most powerful lines or flow that summarizes what you feel. Then I start with gestural lines to capture it, and everything else starts to fell in place naturally.

In photography, this is how I compost my photos as well and I don't expect it to be any different when shooting nudes. Human bodies is tough. With figure drawing, I have the freedom to express what I see in my head. After all, you see with your mind, not your eyes.

One technical thing I can say about your photos is the lack of focus. I don't mean sharpness kind of focus, but where the eye goes to. I think it's because the environment is just as bright as the subject. With human bodies, I would have chosen dark environment with strong lighting to bring up the sense of form with high contrasting shades.

Another way to show the form is to cast interesting shadows onto them, such as window blinds that create stripped shadows... etc.

You are lucky to have access to models to shoot.

 

[jbnhl]

Well, I haven't done much with the human body before, but I think that your photos look very good. I enjoy B&W, and I really think that by going with the 200 like you said, the grain works very well. Keep up the good work!

 

[Sbuxo]

I agree w/ you cow, but I needed to have a white background because my model is African American.

 

[molested_cow]

I agree w/ you cow, but I needed to have a white background because my model is African American.

The right lighting can save the day:
Here's a good example: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photojournalism-sports-gallery/201339-boxing.html

 

[Sbuxo]

I agree w/ you cow, but I needed to have a white background because my model is African American.

The right lighting can save the day:
Here's a good example: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photojournalism-sports-gallery/201339-boxing.html

Wouldn't it transfer differently on B&W film AND fiber paper

 

[Vautrin]

"Black" skin is typically a much lighter shade then the true black you'd have as a background. Your model appears to have a lighter skin tone and you might want to try a couple shots against a black background to see if it works...

 

[knjrphoto]

I did a similar project when I was in college. Except I did self portraits.

 

[Sbuxo]

Congrats.

 

[Paul Ron]

I agree w/ you cow, but I needed to have a white background because my model is African American.

Now that's not rtue at all. Some of the most stunning balck n whites of dark skined people are against dark backgrounds. Use your lights n texture of the skin n depth of blacks to make your subject interesting, more abstract in a sence. Darks n lights will direct the eye around the photo till the brain catches up n realises what you did. That "Ah ha" moment is the prize.

 

[Sbuxo]

@Paul Ron: Merhh, well with my limited lighting it wasn't. I'll be sure to try it though.

p.s.: it's spelled sense.