Bruce, In the future please try to avoid using "toilet" and "anal" in consecutive sentences.
Thanks, frank LOL! On 24 September, 2015 8:25:25 PM EDT, Bruce Walker <[email protected]> wrote: >Igor, I always appreciate that you take the time to render thoughtful >opinions. I'll try and address most of your points. > >On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 5:43 PM, Igor PDML-StR <[email protected]> >wrote: >> >> Bruce, >> >> I second Cotty's summary word by word (even though we probably differ >in >> detail). >> >> Being less diplomatic than Cotty, I can give some specifics if you >are >> interested. > >I am, thank you. > > >> I especially liked 1, 4, 11, 12, even though #11 might look >> somhhwat cliche (or was it your photo that I've seen before? ;-) ) > >Pretty sure I've shown that here as a PESO. Could be wrong though, >I've kinda lost track. > > >> (If those were mine, I would probably try to tone down slightly the >window >> light reflection from the RHS wall in #4) > >I think that's actually blown out though. Would mean some serious >Photoshop'ing. :) > > >> Unless it was a part of some special story, I'd say the toilet in the >> background of #5,6 is not as glamorous as the rest. > >We all liked the vintage bathroom and just had to work with it. I'm >not partial to including toilets in shots (generally: yuck!), but ><shrug> it was there and I decided to go along with it. I've been >practicing being less anal than is my usual tendency to see where that >takes me. My 90mm lens restricted my sightlines though. I had to stand >outside the bathroom shooting in, mostly. > > >> I like the idea of using reflections in #6,7, but it would've been >better if >> the mirror were cleaner in #7. :-) But I suspect that it may not have >> been a planned shot (has it?). > >I asked my shooting partner Judi to bring a mirror and she produced >her makeup mirror. I did not inspect it for grunge -- whoops! It was >my inspiration to ask the model to hold it, and Judi suggested the >"put on makeup" angle. > >Nothing was really pre-planned except that we all arrive at that >location at the same time for a shoot. :) In fact, both myself and >Judi brought lighting gear, but none of it got used at all. I liked >the ambient light and as I was the designated lighting designer, we >shot all ambient. > > >> From the entire set, only two are somewhat bothering me: >> In #8, the pose is too static (as in obviously posed). It looks >obvious that >> she was standing in that pose for some time. It is present in some >other >> shots, but the frozen muscle strain is not as obvious in those. > >That's not true. I honestly don't see where you are getting evidence >of muscle strain from. She's way OOF and what texture you can see on >her back is her ribcage. > >Besides, Araina is not a pose-holder. She is a very dynamic poser and >moves fluidly and quickly from one to the next. If you don't focus and >shoot fast you miss many. :) > >I would sometimes say "please hold that" when I saw a great pose that >I just needed to get but that would be for maybe 5 seconds, tops. > >Now, I agree that #8 is perhaps one of the oddest poses, but I'm >looking for unobvious looks and poses to liven things up. I got the >idea to pose with her reflection looking back at us and I worked it >for a little while and was never 100% happy. This was one of the >better ones, but as it didn't quite click for me I'm not surprised >that you (and many) don't go for it. That's okay as quite a few have >remarked on it and quite like it. Yeah it's weird, and has a toilet in >it, but on a site where most of the women are standing around in >cliche'd poses and locations looking bored, this makes you take >notice. :) > >> Sorry, from the previous discussion, I suspect that it doesn't bother >you. > >I try these things on to see. I like to get feedback yay or nay, so >thanks. > > >> In #10, with that counterlight, - it's an interesting effect, but I >wish it >> was softer with that. I don't know how that can be reached. >> I am thinking that a "soft" portrait lens (Pentax FA-85) might work >for >> that, even though I've never used one. This photo is too softer than >a sharp >> one, but just not soft enough for that "creamy" cloud-of-dream look. >> I don't know, - maybe some local PS experts (Mark?) know how to >enhance that >> in post? > >I hear you. I worked very hard to get the right amount of veiling >flare to get a soft look, and the lens I was using -- the DFA645 90mm >f:2.8 Macro -- just would not flare. It's a beast of a lens, and one >of the best that Pentax has ever made I think. Anyway, this was one of >a handful of shots where with the sun coming straight into the lens >from the model's RHS, I got some nice dreamy softness, though mainly >just on that side. > >There aren't any special "soft portrait" lenses available for the 645Z >that I'm aware of. But you have got me thinking, and I should do some >research to see what was made over the years. Maybe I can eBay one. > >In general though, I only like to buy current new stock. I only own >two 645 lenses: the 55mm f2.8 SDM and the 90mm f2.8 Macro SDM. > >BTW, I have plenty of Photoshop methods available to soften the shot >and make it dreamier, but I chose to leave it at that level. My >portrait plugin has a really good emulation of soft portrait lenses >that I've used in the past for glamour/boudoir style shots. > > >> Igor > >Thanks, Igor! > > >> PS. The website design is weird: clicking on the thumbnail of the >"active" >> photo moves the thumbnail tape to the top, and the active photo >disappears, >> so you'd have to reload the page and start over. And that's in 4 >different >> browsers on Windows. I understand that it is not your website. > >Until you mentioned it I had not experienced that bug. But as I was >writing my responses to you it occurred a few times to me. I think you >jinxed the site, Igor. :) > >The site has launched a recent code change that includes all kinds of >Javascript bugs that prevent quite a few features from working. I >suspect they must be working behind the scenes to fix a raft of >issues. > > >> >> Steve Cottrell Thu, 24 Sep 2015 13:09:50 -0700 wrote: >> >> On 24/9/15, Bruce Walker, discombobulated, unleashed: >> >>> NSFW for mild topless nudity. A baker's dozen shots ... >>> >>> https://www.zivity.com/models/Araina/photosets/57 >>> >>> These images are from my first shoot with local model Araina Nespiak >>> in August. Taken in a borrowed conference space in Mississauga. >> >> >> >> Great job as usual. Regarding style, some I'm not bothered about but >> some are superb. Really really superb. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
