Discussion in 'Photographic Discussions' started by joshusaf, Sep 22, 2015.
Close Thread thanks for your help.
This can't be a real thread.
Half of photography in magazines is of people, I believe the subject of this thread is a valid one
I don't know if this is for real either... you didn't pay for these, I hope? The only picture that looks even somewhat like a usable portrait type shot is the one in the black T shirt by the white fence, that's not too bad. The rest for the most part look at best like just hanging out with your buddies (and the technical quality is not good). Of course I don't know what goes on on dating sites so what do I know.
i did pay for these.
You paid too much. Yes, I know you didn't say how much - it was too much anyway.
I appreciate the feedback, Im sensing the photos are poor quality? I cant tell a good photo froma bad one, that is why I am on this site, I am trying to learn
I think you missed the point of this community, which would evaluate the technical quality of picture itself (composition, light, concept, édition, whatever) but hardly judge just the beauty of the subject (either if you look handsome or ugly).
Anyway, I've been to dating sites and I think the picture's quality does impact on what people think of you. As they said, these pictures are technically poor, but I'd say the numbers 3, 9, 8 do you better than the others.
Sent from my C2104 using Tapatalk
Another female heard from here, but not one who can help much. I really don't know anything about dating sites--although, I can tell you that if there is really THAT much emphasis on having just the right photo, then I'm glad I'm not on those sites. Funny that people will say looks don't matter, but then can't get past "looks" to even find out who a person really is.
Anyway--IF I had to pick one of these, I'd pick either the one labeled 11, but which is the fifth photo in the thread (which is VERY confusing by the way, having numbers ON the photos that doesn't match the order of the photo in the thread), or the one that is labeled #10. #8 is okayish too, but I like #10 because it looks like you being natural.
The reason people are all over the photos is because they look like snapshots someone would take with a phone, not casual, lifestyle portraits you'd actually pay for. The lighting is very harsh, causing hard shadows on your face, and not putting you in a very flattering light (literally). The backgrounds are extremely distracting as well--cars, stairs, etc. behind your head.
I would absolutely NOT use the first one posted, or the ones labeled 2 and 3 (which are the 3rd and 4th posted, I think--this is starting to make my head hurt). The first one would say to me that this is a guy who can't even put his phone down long enough to have a picture taken. The other two say that the photos were so unimportant to you that you didn't even bother to set your drink down.
Get away from the car--girls, for the most part, aren't as interested in your ride as you are.
Redo these. You know what girls want to see in a photo? They want to see YOU. The real you. Not you posing and trying to look like something you're not. A guy is never more attractive to me than when he is confident in himself, he loves life and it shows, and he's engaged in something he loves to do. If you can show one or more of those things, the right girl WILL find you attractive.
Oh, well, also uniforms. I find men in uniforms incredibly attractive and sexy. So, another alternative would be to go join the military.
Yes to everything Sharon said, but especially this ^^^ I'm a woman who loves cars but still would be put off of someone who was SO into his own car (either as a driving machine or a status symbol...doesn't matter) that he had to pose with it.
And yes, the one labeled #10 is the only one I would consider if I were you. #9 wasn't too bad but you're too stiff. The others have distracting background or aren't well-lit or don't help you come off very well. #1...just no. I'm sure you're a perfectly lovely person and you seem enthusiastic and genuine, but in that image, you kind of come off as a tool. Sorry. I understand - you're probably uncomfortable in front of the camera, not sure what to do with your face or hands, and think it might be better if you were "caught" in a candid pose or had a prop or something, but you're much better off just looking at the camera and being yourself.
3 & 10. This from someone who met her significant other on a dating website. We've been together 2 1/2 years. I spent a lot of time on dating websites.
The pictures absolutely matter, but not in the way Sharon thinks. I never judged a person based solely on their looks. However, it did play a part. If they were holding alcohol in every picture, I wasn't interested. And lets be honest, looks do matter to a certain extent. You really do need to be somewhat physically attracted to someone. That said, even if I wasn't bowled over by their looks, that didn't preclude me meeting them.
The other pictures look posed, and forced.
#13 because it has most of a nice car in it - the subject ... oh, and someone standing there in front of it.
But I'm not female so take my objectivity with a grain of salt.
and burn the rest, you can include # 13 too.
Separate names with a comma.