First model shoot, CC pleaase

[amolitor]

The tree branch is out of focus, but tonally and texturally similar to the model's hair, so there's factors that make it less of a problem and other factors that make it more of a problem. The "growing out of her head" thing is a bit of a red herring, it's too big for that effect, to my eye. It's simply a moderately dicey background, as far as I can see.

There's a much bigger problem, though, which is that the model's just standing there. What's she doing there? Why is she there? The setting, framing, and processing say 'ethereal, fairyland' or something, like she's a dryad, but then there's the serious looking girl wearing a nice formal blouse, looking moderately urban.

There's often some incongruity in model shots, but this one strikes me as beyond the pale.

 

[Designer]

Not much to say that is positive, I'm afraid.

Glare and flare.
Extremely distracting background.
Foreground elements in front of model.
Pose very static.

It's as if you wanted to hide the model, or she from you.

 

[cgipson1]

I'm actually a huge fan of lens flares, however I feel like this one may be a photoshop add-in am I right? If it is though, you've placed it very well and it does look natural. I'm not bothered by the tree limb or background at all. I think it gives it a nice organic feel. I LOVE the greens and colour in this photo.

I take that to mean that you have never studied the classic rules / guidelines of portraiture or composition, and probably have no formal education in photography?

I say what I see.
Photography is a form of art, and art is subject to opinion.
There's also no need to have an attitude of superiority around here, we're all either here to learn more or help others learn.

OK.. I will help you (and the OP) learn....

See Watch Out for HotSpots and The Dreaded Polehead: Control Your Background sections on this link: Basic Photo Tips: Framing Your Shots | Journographica

On on the subjectivity of ART... Just as there is good art, and bad art, there are good opinions, and bad opinions! Informed (knowledgeable) opinions are usually the best..

 

[jamesbjenkins]

Second version is MUCH better.

 

[cgipson1]

Not much to say that is positive, I'm afraid.

Glare and flare.
Extremely distracting background.
Foreground elements in front of model.
Pose very static.

It's as if you wanted to hide the model, or she from you.

Agreed.. and I would still like to know why the skin is so plastic! OP.. are you using "Portrait Professional"?

 

[emdiemci]

I personally like it with the flare it gives it a morning forest calm type of feel... that's just what i felt. I do think that branch looks weird popping out of her head. But she is gorgeous and I like this Photograph

 

[mwild]

I take that to mean that you have never studied the classic rules / guidelines of portraiture or composition, and probably have no formal education in photography?

I say what I see.
Photography is a form of art, and art is subject to opinion.
There's also no need to have an attitude of superiority around here, we're all either here to learn more or help others learn.

OK.. I will help you (and the OP) learn....

See Watch Out for HotSpots and The Dreaded Polehead: Control Your Background sections on this link: Basic Photo Tips: Framing Your Shots | Journographica

On on the subjectivity of ART... Just as there is good art, and bad art, there are good opinions, and bad opinions! Informed (knowledgeable) opinions are usually the best..

I can agree with that. And thanks for the info!

 

[pixmedic]

your second edit is MUCH better than the first.
I am not really a big fan of flare. it is rarely used well, and more often than not only adds some bright spot to distract you from the subject.
it does look like you did some smoothing on her skin, or used a noise reduction program that softened it a bit.

 

[amolitor]

I say this from time to time, but it's always worth repeating:

Art isn't subjective, it's intersubjective. That's a word made up specifically, as far as I can tell, to describe what Art Is. It's a word worth looking up and really understanding. You will learn a surprising amount about both Art and Society.

 

[BlackTuxPhoto]

The first one has more flavor and soul in my opinion. Second is just a picture. I like the first, maybeeeee just turn down the whites a little. But imo the flare adds something to the photo.

 

[gwhiz]

Normally I'm a huge fan of what cgibson1 has to say but that did come off a bit condescending and unnecessary. I too represent the "uneducated" and only have a basic understanding of the "classic rules/guidelines of portrait or composition" but to me it's a no-brainer that the first version is the better one. Without the added flare, it's simply a poorly placed model with too much distraction surrounding her. With the flare there is an air of mystery or a "gotcha" moment, almost as if we just caught a fairy in her natural element. Granted, if that were the intention we would have needed an ever-so-slightly better pose from her but the feel is there none the less. The first version is a nicely done piece in a very contemporary style that we're seeing more and more of. Yes, it goes against many "classic" thoughts but it certainly works better than the second version. I'm sure that if the OP wanted to create a typical, classic portrait with this model he would have been more than capable of doing so. I like what he did with it, call me stupid if you like, but aesthetically it's pleasing.

 

[cgipson1]

Normally I'm a huge fan of what cgibson1 has to say but that did come off a bit condescending and unnecessary. I too represent the "uneducated" and only have a basic understanding of the "classic rules/guidelines of portrait or composition" but to me it's a no-brainer that the first version is the better one. Without the added flare, it's simply a poorly placed model with too much distraction surrounding her. With the flare there is an air of mystery or a "gotcha" moment, almost as if we just caught a fairy in her natural element. Granted, if that were the intention we would have needed an ever-so-slightly better pose from her but the feel is there none the less. The first version is a nicely done piece in a very contemporary style that we're seeing more and more of. Yes, it goes against many "classic" thoughts but it certainly works better than the second version. I'm sure that if the OP wanted to create a typical, classic portrait with this model he would have been more than capable of doing so. I like what he did with it, call me stupid if you like, but aesthetically it's pleasing.

This is going to sound condescending too then! One issue we see a lot, is where an image will be posted that has several things wrong with it by someone that doesn't know there is anything wrong with it. Then OTHERS that don't KNOW there is anything wrong with it, come in.. and reinforce those mistakes by saying WOW... and I LOVE IT. If no one spoke up, then the the hypothetical OP would keep on shooting that way because he now thinks it is good since he was told so, by others (even though they don't know enough to recognize what was wrong in the first place!

Addressing this issue usually results in the "It's Art.. It's subjective" comment... which may be true, but when the commenter doesn't know enough to really know good from bad, someone has to "be condescending" and let them know. My delivery is not always "sugar coated", I admit... but hey, I don't get paid for this either... and sometimes I get a little irritated at some of the "overly positive" comments on an image,when they should be "less than positive" comments! (and I am not the only one!)

Just saying "It's Art" does not necessarily make it "Good Art"...

If anyone learned anything here... good... otherwise I (and many others) are wasting our time.

Does that help? Or is this comment "Condescending" also?

We love seeing other people C&C... but please.. instead of a WOW... or and I LOVE IT... state WHY you think it is WOW and why YOU LOVE IT (or at least THINK about it! And do some research if you need to, so that you can better explain it... GOOGLE is your friend!)

 

[jamesbjenkins]

But imo the flare adds something to the photo.

Oh, fake flares add something alright...

A heaping pile of vomit with a side order of awful and a big banner that reads "I'm an amateur, please don't be too harsh!"

 

[cgipson1]

But imo the flare adds something to the photo.

Oh, fake flares add something alright...

A heaping pile of vomit with a side order of awful and a big banner that reads "I'm an amateur, please don't be too harsh!"

Fake Flare is seldom convincing to anyone that knows better! lol! It seldom improves an image.

 

[JoeLeBean]

Big yes without lens flare, even if i really like them