A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Gallery > John Crosley > Photos > Faces in Time > Yevgenia ---Bikini Contest...

previous image in folderYevgenia ---Bikini Contest Winner (of sorts)next image from folder

Yevgenia ---Bikini Contest Winner (of sorts)

By: John Crosley  |  View Full Portfolio (2053 images)


Tags: crosley street-portraits

Add to My Favorites | Critique Image

Photographer's Request for Critique

Yevgenia, Angular Bikini Contest Winner

This is Yevgenia, one of the top winners of Miss Bikini Ukraine contest shortly after this photo was taken (or a contest of like name). Tall, at 180 cm -- 5'11", her long limbs are used to advantage by special placement of her arms in this photo. Your ratings and critiques are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly or very critically, please submit a helpful and constructive comment; please share your superior photographic knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! John

Critiques

John Crosley , September 22, 2008; 09:48 P.M.

No Special 'Portrait' Treatment

For all its appearances, this photo has had NO special treatments in Photoshop or any other image editing program, or any particular lighting 'tricks' to make it appear 'soft' at the edges other than using a very long lens and very selective focus with studio lights (monolights -- portable Novotrons, which I keep in a set and which work on 220 as well as 110-120 -- if one changes modeling lights, of course).

I know it appears 'soft' in some respects, but it was taken with a very contrasty lens -- an 80~200 f 2.8 lens, a tack-sharp lens -- a legend of Nikon manufacturer which is famous in its own right.

This tall, almost 'forward' appearing woman, somehow got 'warm and fuzzy' in front of my camera, while topless and wrapped her very, very long arms around her bodice, and stared directly into the camera. Focus was on her eyes,

'High Key' lighting was achieved in Photoshop with the jpeg version after desaturating, after it was determined that her skin tones were too splotchy to present as a color photo, although they were very nice -- because of some 'mixed lighting' from the monolights and window lighting as well as 'low lighting' from the monolights chosen so I could use a very wide open lens on the tele zoom.

Background, right, is just wallpaper -- no seamless paper available -- but the paper is isolated by being completely out-of-focus, and not of contrasting color at all -- this being a black and white shot.

John (Crosley)

Guillaume Martin , September 23, 2008; 10:35 A.M.

Firstly I am a little confused, in your first paragraph you state there was NO photoshop done on the image, then in your next paragraph you state that you desaturated etc etc in photoshop?

Anyway, I don't think you have isolated the background as well as you think. Because of the overly bright lighting to camera right you have blown some highlights in her hair which has made her hair merge with the background due to the similar tones.

Is this comment helpful?

Pierre Dumas , September 23, 2008; 02:02 P.M.

Good!

Good is the pose, the facial expression and not so good the lack of sharpness and the grain!

PDE

Is this comment helpful?

John Crosley , September 23, 2008; 03:01 P.M.

Guillaume Martin

There was no 'manipulation' of this photo as manipulation is defined in the rules, which means 'selections' and work on selections. It does not mean no work in Photoshop and anything I might have stated to the contrary should be disregarded. It means there has been no 'manipulation to this image. Desaturation in Photoshop or other image editing program is not considered 'Photoshop' work, by the way.

As for the foreground blending with the background, that is entirely intentional, yet if you saw the final, there is nothing 'blown' on it at all. There is information throughout the entire capture. It was artistic intent to keep the hair and the background merged to 'focus' attention on the face.

Thanks for lettine me know your viewpoint.

John (Crosley)

John Crosley , September 23, 2008; 03:15 P.M.

Pierre Dumas

It is a portrait technique NOT to shoot with great sharpness -- great stars often were shot through gauze which accounts for that 'dreamy' look of great softness in the portraits of many aging female movie idols as they sought to keep their audiences.

Softness or sharpness is an artistic choice; here my choice was to go for softness, but not through Photoshop, but simply to use a wide aperture and focus on the eyes so they'd 'anchor' the whole photo.

Thanks for the other compliments.

And for taking the time to write them here and for letting me know your opinions.

John (Crosley)

Meir Samel , October 18, 2011; 02:34 A.M.

Nice high key. hadn't see this before.  I am with Pierre on the softness issue of the eyes. And another one of "our" girls with a bit of acne!

Is this comment helpful?

John Crosley , October 18, 2011; 11:01 A.M.

Meir, this is an interesting one

I posted this one in various representational poses, and very few going for a more 'artistic' look, but this is the standout.

I suppose the eyes is a matter of artistic taste; I'd probably make them sharper now that I have the skills to sharpen them more and the plug-ins, but that was then.

Now is now.

I range all over the place.

I'm about to post one that is VERY sharp -- taken with a 'kit' lens if you can believe it (a man, not a nude).

Thanks for the comment.

john

John (Crosley)

Contribute a critique

Similar / Related Photos  

View other images enjoyed by photo.net members who like this photo.

Find Related Photos


More Photos by Member

View Entire Portfolio