photoport on DeviantArthttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/https://www.deviantart.com/photoport/art/J-382426147photoport

Deviation Actions

photoport's avatar

J

By
Published:
26.9K Views
Image size
711x1000px 246.45 KB
Comments26
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
grandaddyo's avatar
:star::star::star::star-half::star-empty: Overall
:star::star::star::star::star-empty: Vision
:star::star::star::star::star-half: Originality
:star::star::star-empty::star-empty::star-empty: Technique
:star::star::star::star::star-half: Impact

pic #1

In a gallery replete with images all vying to achieve that elusive quality "impact", this image stands out as coming close to the goal. At first sight, a puzzle, but those other images are variations on 'artistic' styles, some conventional, many simply attempts to be different.
It has the virtue of simplicity, which I suspect was an essential intention.
The lady is demure, perhaps shy, and is prepared to reveal not only her breasts, but something of herself, her character. She's reticent to do so, modest, chaste almost, but willing to allow the photographer to capture her emotions and translate them into a visual image; huge trust.
To my mind, this succeeds, regardless of whether the lady is such a person. It doesn't matter in this context; it's what the image-maker wants us to believe that is at centre.

Technically, it suffers from an absence of catch-lights in her eyes [not easy when spectacles are used] and a [probably] large aperture used in the dim light has put parts of her out of focus. This is a whole-body image, not a facial portrait, so not good. The diffuse background is a plus, given the limited tonal range overall. The use of a little soft, indirect bounce-flash might have added more clarity and contre-jour backlighting would transform the effect, but that wouldn't be the effect being sought at the time.



I can find only two other images that could constitute a 'series' and comment on them both. Their standard of composition is in keeping with this one, which I find pleasing, but the technical quality falls so low as to fail them. Perhaps a soft-focus filter was used, which, with a wide aperture, makes for and indistinct result. I cannot imagine that only three pix were produced. There must be more, but maybe the quality was so poor that the photographer declined to publish?

If I have severely criticised the trio, it's partly because of the failings enumerated, but also because the producer has potential to do much better. There is so much poor quality imagery available today that the effort to try a novel approach must be congratulated, even if it didn't quite work out.

I hope that we'll see one or more attempts at the same genre, but taking great care about the matter, composition, lighting, props, background, the whole kit and caboodle . . .
I'd like to see more of the lady as well . . . one way or another.

Top marks for opening the pix to critique; I've given mine as a small quid pro quo in gratitude for the work put in to produce and share the images.
I hope it's all useful.