C&C: Portrait of an Innocent Girl

[shmne]

Not many Quentin Tarantino fans? I could have worked the blood more to get it really looking photo realistic - specifically by whipping up a batch of fake blood and applying it directly to the model. I'd just like to point that out real quick

The harsh lighting is intentional, as is the split lighting. As far as it being too harsh or not, just a matter of opinion so I can't exactly defend that. As you can see in her eyes, the main light was not low at all. As far as the floating head, I could bring back some contrast in the t-shirt she was wearing and probably should a bit. Compositional problems everyone else has point out? I should have left a little more head room, however I disagree that I need to retain the original portrait orientation.

I'm just curious how I am looking for shock value? There is very little shocking about this image. The title "Portrait of an Innocent Girl" comes from the fact that most people will assume the subject was meant to look like she had committed some sort of murderous or heinous crime. The fact is you are making an assumption about a random person based on no knowledge of the subject at hand. For all you know she just got finished painting, and she actually had just gotten finished painting.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

IMO, this is meant for shock value, and the look at me, I'm a troubled artist.

This is the most asinine comment.

 

[adversus]

I didn't assume it was blood at first. Since it was so dark I assumed it was oil, actually.

But really, that's the point of art. This picture leaves a lot up to the imagination, begs the viewer to question just what in the hell that little lady is up to.

 

[SabrinaO]

Kerbouchard, that comment is useless.

Okay, the lighting is either too small or too far away. Much too harsh for my tastes. It looks like the main light was a bit low. The floating head thing doesn't do it for me. And then there are the obvious compositional problems everybody else pointed out. I find the subject and title of this thread to be tasteless. IMO, this is meant for shock value, and the look at me, I'm a troubled artist. It is not an image I enjoyed and if you wouldn't have named this thread something so ridiculously misleading, I would have never clicked on it in the first place.

Wow, what's your problem??
Anyways OP I think this shot is interesting. I think you should burn or blacken that tiny light/ reflection near her right eye. What is that??

 

[Kerbouchard]

My problem is I don't like the shot. I don't think it's art. I would rather not look at a picture of a girl splattered in blood, and I don't appreciate misleading thread titles.

If the OP would have named the thread, "Low Key Portrait of girl covered in blood", than I would have never been at this thread in the first place and I wouldn't have to be defending myself.

Whatever. The OP is now on ignore and I am done with this thread.

 

[adversus]

My problem is I don't like the shot. I don't think it's art. I would rather not look at a picture of a girl splattered in blood, and I don't appreciate misleading thread titles.

For someone taking part in an open and diverse artistic community, seems you have a pretty snobby attitude when it comes to "art".

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

My problem is I don't like the shot. I don't think it's art. I would rather not look at a picture of a girl splattered in blood, and I don't appreciate misleading thread titles.

If the OP would have named the thread, "Low Key Portrait of girl covered in blood", than I would have never been at this thread in the first place and I wouldn't have to be defending myself.

Whatever. The OP is now on ignore and I am done with this thread.

Yup, just like every thread on this forum explicitly tells you what you are going to be looking at. :roll:

After your comments here, I found you belong on the ignore list as well.
Please add me to your list. I rarely title my threads in the manner you desire, so let's save ourselves all the drama.

 

[Kerbouchard]

My problem is I don't like the shot. I don't think it's art. I would rather not look at a picture of a girl splattered in blood, and I don't appreciate misleading thread titles.

For someone taking part in an open and diverse artistic community, seems you have a pretty snobby attitude when it comes to "art".

Okay, next time you have to identify the body of a friend who was raped and murdered, you can tell me what kind images you don't like looking at. Perhaps, I am taking this entire thread too personal. I just don't like the picture.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Ah, so YOU'RE the troubled artist. I see.

 

[SabrinaO]

My problem is I don't like the shot. I don't think it's art. I would rather not look at a picture of a girl splattered in blood, and I don't appreciate misleading thread titles.If the OP would have named the thread, "Low Key Portrait of girl covered in blood", than I would have never been at this thread in the first place and I wouldn't have to be defending myself.Whatever. The OP is now on ignore and I am done with this thread.

WOW!!!! Just wow!! Ignore... really?

 

[adversus]

I'm sorry if you've had a good friend who suffered an unfortunate end, but don't mistake your pain and loss as a requirement for other artists (on the Internet, no less) to conform to your sense of "art". If you don't want to look at it, close your browser. You are going to see things that distress you. Everyone does. That's the consequence of living in a free society where artists are free to pursue their interests.

 

[NikonME]

If you didn't like the composure, lighting, etc. and had 'constructive' criticism, I am sure it would have been welcome (or at least not attacked), but your comments were not constructive, they were rude and pointless.

 

[Kerbouchard]

My problem is I don't like the shot. I don't think it's art. I would rather not look at a picture of a girl splattered in blood, and I don't appreciate misleading thread titles.

If the OP would have named the thread, "Low Key Portrait of girl covered in blood", than I would have never been at this thread in the first place and I wouldn't have to be defending myself.

Whatever. The OP is now on ignore and I am done with this thread.

Yup, just like every thread on this forum explicitly tells you what you are going to be looking at. :roll:

After your comments here, I found you belong on the ignore list as well.
Please add me to your list. I rarely title my threads in the manner you desire, so let's save ourselves all the drama.

That is a decision you will have to make. It seems like there has been enough history between us for me to begin to understand who you are and for you to understand who I am, at least on a basic level. If this thread has made up your mind, then that will have to be your decision. I explained much further than I had any intention in the first place. Seeing that photo after a title like this definitely brought about some emotions. I feel there is enough real life tragedy that a photographer doesn't need to devote his time to re-creating it. It's not an art form I am fond of. Like I have said, if I knew what this thread was going to be about, I would have never clicked on it. Of course, the OP should have the right to create whatever types of art he wants to. That doesn't mean I have to like it or that he should trick people into viewing it.

 

[Vtec44]

It's sarcasm.

 

[shmne]

Wow, what's your problem??
Anyways OP I think this shot is interesting. I think you should burn or blacken that tiny light/ reflection near her right eye. What is that??

Ah that is her eyebrow ring! I may dodge it a bit to show that it is a ring, but if it doesn't work then I would probably have to remove it.
I appreciate those of you who understand that art is art and no one can deny that. I hope some of you actually enjoyed it too!