- This topic is empty.
Portrait double…
-
What are you up to Johnny? I started adjusting my set before I realised what your title
referred to.Personally, I can’t go for this one. Sorry.
Not for me Johnny. I’ve seen shots like this where there is a crisp first image and a movement meshed in, this one just looks confused. The idea is interesting and the lighting good. If the expression matched the feel, I think it would have worked well.
Si
Yeah I just saw a shoot from Craig McDean who did something similar, just thought I’d try something different, just alot of cliched portraits around and nothing different I guess.
It’s almost impossible to do something completely new, Cliches become so because they’re normally what people want, and usually work well. I find that the odd “Accident” can result in an interesting shot. :)
Si
I like this photo a lot. It’s clean and interesting, it keeps my attention. I don’t need perfection, the whole world is struggling to be perfect. Ovexposed nose and forehead, confusing eyes, it’s like having a second look at a perfect model and seeing the human behind the mask.
JohnnyMcMillan wrote:
Yeah I just saw a shoot from Craig McDean who did something similar, just thought I’d try something different, just alot of cliched portraits around and nothing different I guess.
Isn’t this statement a bundle of contradictions?
Good to see some experimentation. Sure its a bit bright on the nose etc… but I’ve back a few times to
look at it so it must have something :) Thumbs up from meI really like this Johnny!
It’s haunting.
I think Randomway said it all.
I prefer the thought provoking when I have a choice.
She’s absolutely beautiful, but it wouldn’t hold any charm for me if she were perfectly focused and staring blandly into the camera.
Shar
Interesting shot Johnny.
The more I look at it, the more I like it.
Its good to go against the grain from time to time.
Stick with it.JohnnyMcMillan wrote:
jb7 wrote:
JohnnyMcMillan wrote:
Yeah I just saw a shoot from Craig McDean who did something similar, just thought I’d try something different, just alot of cliched portraits around and nothing different I guess.
Isn’t this statement a bundle of contradictions?
Sorry, I meant on this site…
Johnny,
Not sure if you meant it this way, but your statement above could be construed as both
disparaging and dismissive to those of us who try our hands at portraiture from time to time.
I’m trying not to be offended but I can’t help feeling just a little bit so…Clich?d has such negative overtones. The human face, no matter how it’s photographed,
is anything but a clich?, each one unique, each one its own story to tell, a thing of beauty warts and all.
I’m hoping I’ve just gotten hold of the wrong end of the stick completely…As for this portrait, definitely interesting to look at – I can imagine it poster-sized or as artwork on
a CD cover. Beautiful model with really intense eyes. Very different approach, and I like it…Rob.
JohnnyMcMillan wrote:
Yeah I just saw a shoot from Craig McDean who did something similar, just thought I’d try something different, just alot of cliched portraits around and nothing different I guess.
It’s difficult to be different as someone, somewhere would have done it. There’s nowt wrong with cliche’s if it’s what your clients want, or you do it better than the norm. I’ve had people come to me with a portrait where half the face is showing and telling me they thought they’d do something different! Or a double exposure with a second ghost image (there was a brilliant one of these on a Pentax advert years ago, can’t find it I’m afraid).
Experimentation is great fun but I’d urge you to be less dismissive of what you don’t like, or what you think is cliche as, I’m afraid, they’re no more or less cliched than the shot at the top of the thread, we’ve all done one like it! :)
All best, loving your work
Si
A wise reply from Si.
We love you Johnny, and we love your work, but you don’t want to sound like an upstart.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
