Portrait of my Girlfriend :)

[o hey tyler]

You are in the wrong place. People hijack threads to pursue personal vendettas all the time on this forum.

And guess what....the Mods just let it happen.

C'mon - that doesn't happen here!!

Its really poor form. I feel kind of bad for the OP. I doubt he cares that Derrel and Tyler dislike eachother.

And yet they turn his thread into their own soap opera.

FYI, I posted twice in this thread. The first one being a respectful counter-view of Derrel's opinion that he stated as fact. The second, as a response to why Derrel feels the need to attack everyone for holding a different opinion than his archaic viewpoints on what photography should be.

I don't see how that's a thread hijack. You've posted the same amount of times, yet somehow managed to not add anything to the conversation. Strange how that works, eh?

 

[o hey tyler]

You know there's two schools here and they are both important. What I've noticed from our sales is that, the negative, tilted, creative, horizontal images with negative space, artistic shots are the ones that land the client. These are the images that get them to hire us based on "style" lol whatever that means.

Yes! Cam, that's exactly what I am talking about. You don't "get" clients by maintaining the course. You show them something different that piques their interest, not a Sears Portrait studio pose with Rembrandt lighting.

But...but...guess what these clients who hired us based on our style choose from their prints? You will never guess. As young modern and ubranized the San Francisco market is, they typically choose the prom poses, the looking into camera traditionals that they hang on their walls. Regarding print sales...I'm with Charlie and Derrel. If you don't sell prints...you will never see this perspective.

I agree with this as well, and that's why you shoot both outside the box and inside the box. It never hurts, right?

 

[jwbryson1]

At this point, the OP is a bit like this little fellow:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg" target="_blank">


He just doesn't Give a $hit anymore! :mrgreen:

 

[Alex_B]

At this point, the OP is a bit like this little fellow:

He just doesn't Give a $hit anymore! :mrgreen:

The voice and intonation on that video are so ...

*shivers*

 

[JAC526]

C'mon - that doesn't happen here!!

Its really poor form. I feel kind of bad for the OP. I doubt he cares that Derrel and Tyler dislike eachother.

And yet they turn his thread into their own soap opera.

FYI, I posted twice in this thread. The first one being a respectful counter-view of Derrel's opinion that he stated as fact. The second, as a response to why Derrel feels the need to attack everyone for holding a different opinion than his archaic viewpoints on what photography should be.

I don't see how that's a thread hijack. You've posted the same amount of times, yet somehow managed to not add anything to the conversation. Strange how that works, eh?

Well the only reason I said anything is lately it seems that this has been happening in a lot of threads.

That is all. I will not bicker back and forth with you. You seem to like it too much.

 

[camz]

You know there's two schools here and they are both important. What I've noticed from our sales is that, the negative, tilted, creative, horizontal images with negative space, artistic shots are the ones that land the client. These are the images that get them to hire us based on "style" lol whatever that means.

Yes! Cam, that's exactly what I am talking about. You don't "get" clients by maintaining the course. You show them something different that piques their interest, not a Sears Portrait studio pose with Rembrandt lighting.

Both has to be done if trying to land clients of today I think and especially if one is trying to get into the print sales. It's really funny how to flip the script on you once they chose something for the wall. What we place on the blog or website are rarely the ones that clients choose for prints...yeps you got it.

 

[ghache]

Vertical or landscape.. Who cares! I am sick of those comments. Yes, portraits do work in landscape too! Why being so anal?

Anyway, nice shot. For me its just a bit overworked. Looks plastic. Skin, eyes....

Maybe don't bash comments from full time working professionals who offer accurate critique... mmmkay?

Anal? More like correct technical form. A portrait shouldn't chop off the top 10% of the subject's head. Simple.

full time professional ? who Derrel? doesnt mean i am a mechanics for years and making a living from it that i am a good mechanics. as far as i know, Derrel is nowhere near a professional photographer.​

 

[The_Traveler]

Vertical or landscape.. Who cares! I am sick of those comments. Yes, portraits do work in landscape too! Why being so anal?

Anyway, nice shot. For me its just a bit overworked. Looks plastic. Skin, eyes....

Maybe don't bash comments from full time working professionals who offer accurate critique... mmmkay?

Anal? More like correct technical form. A portrait shouldn't chop off the top 10% of the subject's head. Simple.

full time professional ? who Derrel? doesnt mean i am a mechanics for years and making a living from it that i am a good mechanics. as far as i know, Derrel is nowhere near a professional photographer.

Aww come on.
This kind of sniping at personalities is truly destructive to the site and to the maker's reputation.
If what Derrel, or anyone, says makes sense and is useful in the context, it doesn't make any difference if he's a full-time pro or started yesterday.
I know full time pros I wouldn't trust with a passport photo just as I know amateurs whose work and opinion I respect.

 

[SoonerBJJ]

It is ironic in these discussions that the same person is often the first to remind everyone of his many years of experience, and that his images are the embodiment of all that is boring and ordinary.

@ the Olan Mills reference.

 

[tirediron]

Everyone go outside and take a picture. We're done here.