my first Teen Shoot c&c

[Travis F]

Do you really believe I care what you think? You greatly overestimate your importance in the universe.

Actually I am quite at peace with my place in the universe. I am a firm believer in the cosmic energy that surrounds us all. There is an ebb and a flow to energy. I realize that I am only a minute particle in the grand scheme of things, but nonetheless, my part holds a significant place because I exist and I contribute towards that end.

Are you making a similar contribution?

Dude, you made me laugh out loud! This is the post to end all posts ! You must be a Jedi...?

x3 - FTW - (I'm old, is that; for the win?)

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Ooooooh...you should always post in er111a's threads then.

Che?

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-forum-photo-gallery/214431-these-better.html

He needs your "help".

 

[pgriz]

Wow, lots of verbiage, accusations of latent pedophilia, lack of talent, etc. So is this a reflection of our society’s preoccupation with mammaries? Methinks the reactions say more about the posters than about the original photographer. And what guidance do the critical comments give the OP? Probably to post in a different forum…

First image: Girl is posed with head resting on rails. Rails show strong perspective effect, reinforced by the road lines paralleling the rails. Selective color on the caboose. Stylistically, a throwback to the “damsel in distress in front of a speeding train”. The selective color draws the eye first to the train. Once there, we follow the tracks outward and come across the girl. Our memory cells spark up and say “oh, damsel in distress situation”. However, the story is undermined by the stairs leading to the caboose, and… that concete brick on the outside of the right rail bothers me. My thinking that to make this image work, the OP may have zoomed in the lens a little causing a “motion blur” centered on the girl, and blurring some of the extraneous detail. That would have also created an illusion of motion, supporting the central premise of the pose. The selective color of the caboose is red, normally meaning “danger”, but the static elements undermine the intent.

Second image: I see an attractive girl posing on the grass. I focus on her eyes and her smile. Photographically, a shallow depth-of-field would have blurred out the grass and allowed us to enjoy her happy attitude. Her low neckline could be a distraction for some people, I guess, but that’s not her problem – that the viewers’ problem. Her face could have benefited from a reflector bouncing some light onto her face, and perhaps accenting the catch-lights in her eyes.

Third image: the light’s direction is causing (to my mind) rather strong shadows and highlights that are not as flattering to her. Again, a reflector would have helped reduce the shadow lines. The relatively shallow depth of field is good, but standing her a bit further from the wall would have blurred the wall even more, reducing the conflict in attention with her. In this pose, there is a hint of a second chin which the photographer should have noticed and asked the subject to extend her head just a little.

So the rather harsh comments that some have made don't really seem appropriate.
I also notice that one poster seems to draw the most amount of reaction... Seems that thread hijacking is a hobby...

 

[Stephen.C]

Why would you put your own childs boobs on the internet? That is worse. Maybe I am out of touch with reality but you think it is ok to do that? I am at a loss for words as I will never comprehend a mother displaying a daughter like that. I am old fashioned maybe but I do not agree with that sort of picture with a child to begin with and for some reason I would think a person would have an ounce of comprehension that they are displaying their child inappropriately. You should not be offended you should be ashamed.

I didn't want to reply to this thread at all, but really, this guy should be banned.

 

[timlair]

I am so glad I am not you.

Is that your best effort?
C'mon dude.... gimme something to work with.

Do you really believe I care what you think? You greatly overestimate your importance in the universe.

Are you the pot pot or the kettle?

I didn't really wanna comment on this whole thread either, but where are the mods/admins? Someone needs to be banned.

As for Robyn, I like the idea with number 1 but zoom in a bit more. 2 is a good idea IMO, but it has its downfalls. Number 3 is by far the best. I like it. Keep up the good work :thumbup:

 

[Derrel]

then it's time to get off the web and STOP POSTING nonsense.

 

[DerekSalem]

Well I actually read through all 11 pages before posting...which took a ton of time I might add lol

1) Like mostly everyone has said...the focus is absolutely not put on the teen. The selective coloring makes the eyes immediately go to the train but even besides that she takes up way too small a space in the frame. Get closer and fill up more of the frame with the subject (her)

2) This is where my opinion is going to come across as rough. While I understand that they're "only boobs" and that every female on the planet Earth has them (in different variations)...it's still usually not a great idea to show them to the world if you can help it (at that age). I'm sure *she* is proud of them but that's when you as the parent (as you said you were) use your superior wisdom to rectify the situation.

Obviously she's well-endowed...nothing can change that and nobody can deny it. The problem is a low-cut shirt shows off the cleavage *QUITE* a bit for a girl that age and although I'm not telling you how you should feel...most parents would be completely ashamed to have a picture of their daughter like that on the internet and in the public eye.

3) Acceptable but cuts off part of the subject. And the lighting could use some work.

 

[Nobleman201]

I quite agree with you. It looks to me the person taking these pictures needs to appreciate the life he has yet left. Note of concern: I do hope this isn't a person related to him. As this would cause concern with others who work with kids.

 

[edouble]

Really people? You are seriously that offended by seeing cleavage from a young model? It is not purposely intended cleavage from lingerie or a push up bra, just her natural body. Wow, maybe the mother should not have posted pictures of her daughter because people on the internets cant handle it?????

 

[SecondShot]

People can't handle it. Pitchforks have already been drawn from the hovels and the town crier has been busy. Torches are being distributed as we speak, Señor Capitán. I heard some townsfolk talk about asking the local duke and shire reeve to borrow the dunking spoon to use at the lake.

 

[graecyn]

I'm in no way offended by it; I'm a girl, I have boobs, I see 'em every day. But I'm pretty sure the OP intended for the picture to be more about her daughter's face and less about her daughter's boobs, which are front and center here, literally.

As for how the OP should feel about her daughter's tits being in a public forum, I don't really know. I don't have kids, I have no idea how she "should" feel. I know *I* would more than likely be irritated by it, but that's just me. I'm not terribly worried with how other people should feel about their daughter's bits being on the net.

But she wanted critique on the photos. The general consensus is that the photo says, "I've got big boobs". That's probably not something she intended to have happen with her kid. Maybe she did! She might NOT be bothered by it, and that's cool. However, given the composition, the photo is more about her daughter's boobs than her daughter's face. And the OP will not learn from her mistake unless she's told, "Hey, that's a little too much cleavage for the shot."

Boobs are a natural distraction for many people, especially men (how many of the women in this forum have smacked their guy in the head for staring at a woman's chest?). Everyone on the beginner's forum is always quick to point out distraction in other photos, be it a hair clip, a tree in the background, bracelets on the wrong wrist, a stray dust mite, whatever. In the second photo, the boobs are a distraction to me, and obviously to many others. I'm not offended by them. I'm not saying, "ZOMG EVIL BEWBS". I'm not calling anyone a pedophile, or spouting off at the mouth that because her daughter's boobs are on the net, she's a bad mother. I don't care. All she asked for was critique. The critique of many people is, "The boobs are too much." I hardly see how letting her know this is a bad thing if that's the critique she was looking for.

 

[Skyclad]

Some people are helped by being told they should pursue another endeavour.

Then let me help you a little here;

Pursue another endeavor... far, far away from this thread. And don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. (Might knock the door off its hinges if it did)

 

[err_ok]

Are there any moderators on this forum ? Comedy....

1 - Tighter crop, selective colour should be on the point of interest
2 - I would have framed it differently... wider aperture and I agree with the bangle removal comment..
3 - Least flattering photo, angle's not brilliant, cut of limb etc..

That really wasn't anything new was it but I thought after reading the last 11 pages I should at least write something...

Thank you for entertaining me during a boring day at work, I hope the OP survives this and continues to post! Personally i prefer the Reputation system in vBulletin over the thank system as you can have negatives which gives you some idea of who is a moron...

 

[Petraio Prime]

Some people are helped by being told they should pursue another endeavour.

Then let me help you a little here;

Pursue another endeavor... far, far away from this thread. And don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. (Might knock the door off its hinges if it did)

Some people just don't have a good 'eye', and there's not much that can be done about it.That is not intended as an insult.

 

[benlonghair]

I wouldn't reply to bump this, but it's at the top anyway.

I can not believe this is still going. OMFG people are way too uptight in the US.