> fra: Glen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I joked about the kid and kittens shot, because I wondered if every picture > of a girl had to be cute to get a favorable review here. I was just > wondering if everyone had become so "glamour" and "traditional portrait" > oriented that an experimental shot which didn't glorify the beauty of the > subject didn't have much of a chance.
First: I'm not among those who only accept "glamour" or "traditional portrait", as you may see in some of these: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=175721 http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=180688 http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=149935 http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=120471 (you dont have to like any of them .-) On the other hand, regarding you pictures, I see a fairly tradisional glamour shot with some additional effects. The effects dont add much to the photo other than a short visual surspise. The effects do not add anything to her expression or anything else in the photo. So, keep experimenting, but remember that an uninteresting photo never gets more interesting with a random effect. You have to chose something that corresponds to, and maybe amplifies, something that is already in there. DagT
