Girl and her violin

JayG1372

TPF Noob!
Joined
May 8, 2017
Messages
56
Reaction score
24
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Violin Portrait.webp
 
Very nice image. Like tje pose, b&w tones, leading lines from the fence, and composition.
 
Thank you all very much! I appreciate your kind words; and I am truly humbled by them!
 
Very nice image. Like the composition and tones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Very nicely done!
 
I am posting this with the OP's approval.
It is difficult to be objective of a lovely photo of a lovely model but this would be one to reshoot for one specific reason.
If I had posted this picture below, the response would be that I had chopped off her feet - but that is what the original picture did.

upload_2017-5-14_16-49-19.webp


upload_2017-5-14_16-48-36.webp


Note also the bright objects in the background and foreground that pull from focussing on the subject

Without those distractions, the picture becomes less cluttered yet none of the important elements are missing.

upload_2017-5-14_16-51-8.webp


My last comment is that there are blanched spots on her cheekbones and shoulder and the tops of her legs from the overhead light.
I would suggest correcting those and lightening the rest of the face so it isn't so dark.

Thanks, OP
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-5-14_16-47-41.webp
    upload_2017-5-14_16-47-41.webp
    29.2 KB · Views: 107
Please allow me to present a totally opposing point of view regarding the cropping of the original shot. A different perspective, if you will:

Cropping away the fence on the right-hand side changes the depth of the scene and reduces it to a single-plane subject, and eliminates the looking-past-a-foreground-element compositional device, and IMO is not an improvement, since it reduces the planes of the scene and it worsens the lopped off feet issue; with the photo as-shot originally, there was a valid, shown, obvious rationale for the missing feet; with the cropped image, it looks like an utterly clueless, careless photographer decided to crop her off at the ankles AND decided to include the fence behind her back! The original framing had a rationale behind it; the cropped-image concept makes little sense to me.

The "blanched" cheekbone concept I find a bit ofputting...that "blanched" area is a highlight, one that draws attention to her face, and shows that she has beautiful, high cheekbones. This is a B&W shot....light advances, dark recedes...the highlight on her cheekbone is not a "blanched spot"...but reveals a beautiful highlighted feature of her face...and the same goes for the highlights on her shoulders, and near her kneecaps...those are not blanched spots, but are visual depth and contouring clues.

Sometimes the photographer's original intent makes more sense than a crop made after the fact.
 
I forgot to mention that IMO, the darkening of that background flagpole or whatever it is, that decision DEFINITELTY created a major improvement to the image by The_Traveler...his post-processing decision on toning that one element down makes the emphasis much more on the girls and her violin, and keeps the eye on the foreground by eliminating a major, ugly distracting element!
 
the OP's photos are beautiful but I dislike her feet cut off at the ankles.
 
Not to make an excuse; but to explain, I did not have a wide enough lens for the angle I was at. This was shot with an 85mm on a crop body, bring me to around 135. I would have had her pull her legs in closer, but I did not want her dress to hike up. I appreciate all the insight and feedback and definitely will think about framing more when taking shots like this. Thank you all
 
Cropping away the fence on the right-hand side changes the depth of the scene and reduces it to a single-plane subject, and eliminates the looking-past-a-foreground-element compositional device, and IMO is not an improvement, since it reduces the planes of the scene and it worsens the lopped off feet issue; with the photo as-shot originally, there was a valid, shown, obvious rationale for the missing feet; with the cropped image, it looks like an utterly clueless, careless photographer decided to crop her off at the ankles AND decided to include the fence behind her back! The original framing had a rationale behind it; the cropped-image concept makes little sense to me.

Sorry, sometimes life interferes with the Internet and just came back to this with new comment from Dashur

My mistake, I didn't mean to imply that the fence should be cropped off, only that by keeping the fence there and including the tiny bit of shoe, makes the photo look like a framing error. I would/should have suggested moving the fence a bit left, thus higher up her leg so the framing looks like a choice.

In regards the blotchiness, on a monitor the luminescence through the shadows makes the contrast tolerable. IME, printing an image with this much contrast will emphasize both the shadow and the highlight and increase the appearance of blotchiness in the skin to an unpleasant degree.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-5-18_13-59-6.webp
    upload_2017-5-18_13-59-6.webp
    6.8 KB · Views: 84
Last edited:
Cropping away the fence on the right-hand side changes the depth of the scene and reduces it to a single-plane subject, and eliminates the looking-past-a-foreground-element compositional device, and IMO is not an improvement, since it reduces the planes of the scene and it worsens the lopped off feet issue

Well said... and I agree.

-Pete
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top