Jake

[Wolff]

My fist studio (if you can call it that) shots. Please feel free to tear them apart, it's the only way I'll learn.

 

[Boden]

The first one doesn't work because your cutout is too obvious and it looks like your dog is floating.

The second one is a little better (except for some dark edges) but the focus is on his nose instead of his eyes. You should typically focus on the eyes when the subject has eyes.

Overall the white background doesn't contrast enough with your dog's coat color so he doesn't stand out like he should. Also, it's a dog... dogs like this are about playing fetch and fishing and going to the park and chasing rabbits and other dog stuff... placing your dog in a white void is a little bit unnerving. Green grass is what my mind wants to see under him.

Beautiful animal!

 

[mysteryscribe]

well grass is a stretch for a studio but I would have tossed a rug for him to lay on to ground him as the first comments said. He appears a bit high key for an animal mostly that high key is good for women and children.

Also comment on the eyes is dead on. If the eyes are sharp we percieve the pictures as sharp if not we percieve it as overal soft.

 

[Miss V]

I agree with both of them.
very pretty dog though

 

[Puscas]

And I agree with miss V on the agreeing. Oh and you've got a nasty typo in your first sentence....:mrgreen:






pascal

 

[browniedoll]

i agree as well that the dog should have been photographed with a different colour, there's not enough contrast. in the first shot it appears as though the dog is floating, there's no detail in the background. in the second shot the no detail works because it's just a head shot. and you really should have the eyes in focus unless it's very apparent that you only want the nose, which in this case it's not.