2 casual portraits for cc....

cailinp

TPF Noob!
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Location
Germany
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Went out for coffee with the munchkin and a girlfriend yesterday. Shot this quick.

DSC_0112-2.jpg


DSC_0114-2.jpg
 
Well done for "quick"! Clean background, no distractions. Good focus on the eyes.
I prefer the first over the second. Her pose in the second seems contrived somehow, in the first she just looks good. Pretty. Nice.
 
ya the background in #1 is simple, which is a good thing. :thumbup:
 
Looks good for quick shots. Those eyes are way, way too white for quick shots IMO (especially the first photo). Whites of the eyes should look like that in fashion magazines, if at all.
 
Looks good for quick shots. Those eyes are way, way too white for quick shots IMO (especially the first photo). Whites of the eyes should look like that in fashion magazines, if at all.


Your right about the first photo. I did way to much editing there on her eye whites and have been way to lazy to go fix it. It's just for fun though. However, I didn't think the second one was so bad. I didn't even do anything to the whites specifically. All I really did was adjust white balance, exposure...etc.
 
Wow.. pretty face, beautiful eyes, nice teeth. I would ask her to pose again. For real this time.
 
Last edited:
Guten TAG. The lighting in that place was great. All natural? or bounce? It's super soft.
 
1) the hand in front of her chest is distracting to me. The size seems a little distorted or malformed (or the angle), so it tends to pull my attention away from her face, where it should be.

Other than that, I like the photos, especially for casual portraits.
 
Guten TAG. The lighting in that place was great. All natural? or bounce? It's super soft.


All natural. This coffee shop has an enclosed outside area so the lighting is great. I think this picture was even taken at like around 2pm!
 
Looks good for quick shots. Those eyes are way, way too white for quick shots IMO (especially the first photo). Whites of the eyes should look like that in fashion magazines, if at all.

Great pickup. I didn't even notice my first run through.
 
These were shot from a very close distance, which is causing a slight bit of distortion of the size of her hand and body features. She's a very lovely woman, so she's an excellent photographic subject. I like the first picture better, since the background is better controlled. When a subject has her face pointed away from the camera but directs her eyes back toward the camera at an extreme angle like this, that is known as "eye cut", and is almost universally (cross culturally in most cultures around the world) perceived as conveying sexual interest, so that makes these shots "sexy".

I wish the background in the second photo were cleaner...the stuff in the lower left corner area and the angle kind of dillute the impact of the second shot.
 
These were shot from a very close distance, which is causing a slight bit of distortion of the size of her hand and body features. She's a very lovely woman, so she's an excellent photographic subject. I like the first picture better, since the background is better controlled. When a subject has her face pointed away from the camera but directs her eyes back toward the camera at an extreme angle like this, that is known as "eye cut", and is almost universally (cross culturally in most cultures around the world) perceived as conveying sexual interest, so that makes these shots "sexy".

I wish the background in the second photo were cleaner...the stuff in the lower left corner area and the angle kind of dillute the impact of the second shot.

Derrel...Have I told you lately how much I love your feedback?! Your amazing. Thank you.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top