She's an alley girl.

[CMPhotos]

These are some shots I took a few years ago. Just wondering what people think.

 

[ronlane]

They are underexposed.

 

[DarkShadow]

This^^ Also in all honesty the poses are terrible.#2 being the worst of the trio, She looks like she is a robot and #3 looks like she is squatting to pee. Sorry but all the poses are unflattering.

 

[DiskoJoe]

I like the elements of this shoot, it had potential. But the right elements dont mean much if you dont know how to bake them in a cake. yeah, the poses suck.

 

[krystalynnephoto]

I agree with the above posters... they are underexposed, and the poses confuse me. This had a lot of potential... I'm just not sure what you were going for. That outfit could be super sexy, though...

 

[DanielLewis76]

I think its the outfit that wrong. If she was kitted out in a worker gear it would be better instantly. Not really sure, from a viewers perspective, why an office girl would be climbing between metal cables...

 

[Braineack]

This^^ Also in all honesty the poses are terrible.#2 being the worst of the trio, She looks like she is a robot and #3 looks like she is squatting to pee. Sorry but all the poses are unflattering.

I was going to say #2 was the better of the poses; where they all still look unnatural and unflattering.

 

[Buckster]

I think its the outfit that wrong. If she was kitted out in a worker gear it would be better instantly. Not really sure, from a viewers perspective, why an office girl would be climbing between metal cables...

This is the only comment so far that I agree with.

"Underexposed" is subjective. Light and shadow and exposure values create a mood, and the mood of these images is obviously meant to be dark. Thus, to me, it's not "underexposed". The exposure value is correct to create the intended mood.

The poses aren't bad, horrible, terrible, "looking like she's squatting to pee", etc. to my perception. For someone working with that hardware and those cables, those kinds of poses are appropriate. The reason they don't work is...

The clothing. It's not work clothing, and so it doesn't fit in with the theme of the shoot, which is working with rusty hardware and cables. It could possibly work if there was some way to pictorially tell the story of WHY she's in THOSE clothes, in THAT place, engaging in THAT activity that makes sense to the viewer. Without that story-telling element however, I think she needs to be in work clothes, and probably with some strategically placed dirt or grease on her clothing, hands and face to make this really work.

Beautiful model, btw. Reminds me of Kari Byron of Mythbusters.

 

[amolitor]

Buckster is spot on. The poses look awkward, to be sure, but the scene is awkward and surreal. What's going on here?

If she's standing their doing standard model stuff, then what's going on is 'some douchebag shoved his model in front of some junk to make his crappy derivative pseudo-fashion photos look "edgy"'. This still reads as a bit gimmicky, but at least it's a coherent vision instead of some boilerplate.

If anything these are too bright, to my eye. This should be a darker scene. New photographers are afraid of shadows and darkness, don't me. Don't let 'em go flat, but use 'em. Darkness is powerful.

 

[CMPhotos]

Ok. I understand the exposer may be off depending on who likes what. The clothing was a conscience decision at attempting a juxtaposition between subject and environment (that doesn't seemed to have been a good decision). The poses however I agree are not the strongest. The first is awkward looking. The third I don't like that I cut her leg off and is doesn't show the strain I was hoping for in the shot. The second is probably my favorite. I thank everyone for the critique, keep them coming.

 

[Derrel]

No, I "get" the deliberate clothing mismatch...it's often seen-- in literature, it's the old "fish out of water" twist often used in story-telling, and we see deliberate clothing/location mismatches all the time in fashion and catalog work, where a fashionably dressed female model is deliberately placed in an environment in which the clothes make pretty much no logical sense at all, like an evening gown line photographed at say, a commercial fish landing dock, or high fashion, expensive rain wear shown in a bone-dry, high desert "American Southwest" environment, and of course, who can forget the classic "bikinis and beachwear on the ski slopes" trope?

I think the second picture is the best. The third one hints at the sex appeal of both the fine-looking redheaded woman and the outfit, but the missing leg...ugh...that really hurts that shot.

 

[kundalini]

The first shot is confusing to me because you have a high shoulder and a low shoulder (a very good thing), but each hand position thwarts the line created. High shoulder should have high hand position and likewise with the low shoulder having a lower hand position. #2 and #3 are the better examples you've provided.

 

[gregtallica]

I think its the outfit that wrong. If she was kitted out in a worker gear it would be better instantly. Not really sure, from a viewers perspective, why an office girl would be climbing between metal cables...

She's an alley girl on the inside?


Idk, is that what girls want to be these days? I'm pretty disconnected, are they all like Miley Cirus?