Bicycle Pinups

[Bicyclepinups]

My original idea and work in progress...

 

[Bicyclepinups]

 

[ShaneF]

holly watermark batman!!!

 

[tirediron]

I don't think your watermark is quite large enough; some of the image is still visible!

There's some serious potential here, but to be honest, I don't really get "pinup" from these, I think because her clothing doesn't really fit at least my idea of 'pin up'.

 

[Ilovemycam]

They have tons of them on the MTB forum. Better than yours and with no WM. Now, yours are OK, but the WM ruins what little thay have going for them.

 

[Gavjenks]

Yes, the watermark here is absolutely ridiculous. Taking up more space than the entire subject and/or distracting so much that you can't even imagine what the picture might be without it are both inexcusable IMO. This does both.


As for the images:
#1) Why so much grass on the left. That's not even the direction she's looking. This feels awkward. It looks almost like you left that much grass space just to fit the watermark, lol. If the empty grass were on the right side of her, it would make much more sense.

#2) I would make it less tilty to the left, but otherwise a pretty good shot.



I don't think either of these qualifies as "pinup" at all, by the way.

 

[Bicyclepinups]

 

[Gavjenks]

The last one is slightly more pinup-y. Unlike the first two, the pose is pinup, but the clothing still is not.

She seems a little weirdly distorted from using such a wide lens close up, I'm not sure that adds to the goal of the image. I would have suggested using a longer lens from further back (on a ladder or wall or tree if necessary for the angle)

 

[Bicyclepinups]

Thank you, the grass on the left was a texture I was experimenting with, and also very convenient for a large emblematic watermark.

 

[Bicyclepinups]

 

[Murray Bloom]

The last is almost porn, but still not a pinup to me. Most pinups I've seen show the model's face, often with an alluring expression. Your model looks a bit bored. The clothes are wrong, too.

 

[Bicyclepinups]

 

[Bicyclepinups]

View attachment 55765

 

[Gavjenks]

It would be helpful if you actually mentioned why you were posting new images instead of just posting more. Are these intended to be examples of something more pinup? Or do you just want more critique in general? Or what?

Both of the last two look really badly out of proportion, again from using a wide lens from too close. In this case, since the lens it very low, it makes her look like she has freakishly huge thick legs, which is very unflattering.

Same technical advice as before: longer lens, further away. A wide lens CAN be really great for portraiture, but only if it is used very cleverly to exaggerate features in a way that still flatters. Which is not happening here.

Also, like many people, I find it very distracting when something that we know is very straight (like bricks or pillars) are not straight. If there's a good artistic reason to draw somebody's attention to that, then great. But I don't think there is such a good reason here. The bricks/pillars just sort of make me pay less attention to the model. Again, can be addressed with a longer lens, further away, and from a more eye-level height.

(Can't stress enough that that's not the only "right" way to do portraiture. I'm just repeatedly suggesting it for YOU in particular, because you seem to be choosing dramatic focal lengths and angles mostly for their own sake and not in ways that clearly further the image, so I'd step away from those drama-makers for awhile and practice the fundamentals more)

 

[Bicyclepinups]

What is the MTB Forum? I would like to take a look myself.

They have tons of them on the MTB forum. Better than yours and with no WM. Now, yours are OK, but the WM ruins what little thay have going for them.