Follow Me.....!?

[KENNETHD]

M U S T I be the one to point you to the obvious? This is not a shadow. It is a very reflective surface, upon which the lady stands. Note the reflection of the other objects to the right and the left. Could this not also be a muted reflection of her form? It gives the image better clarity, and a more "real" feel, by leaving the "shadow' or better still reflection in the picture. Although maybe, from a purely optical point of view if it were a reflection it would be less leaning and more straight in line of sight. But regardless, it's a sweet bit of work.

Kd

[vIZnquest]

Whom are you obviously talking to? Thanks for your input though. Must be the NorthernCalifornia sunshine getting to me out here.

[VAtechtigger]

except reflections generally dont angle away from the thing they are reflecting

[In search of Syd]

[LBoy]

Syd wrote :

It has already been mentioned above enough times about the various technical faults and imperfections in this image, as has the need to re-edit an already well received posting earler.

I was hoping you could explain the intention you had here? What were your thoughts as you recreated this? What is the barely visible female figure representing? Why is she lifting the hem of her dress ever so slightly showing more thigh and seemingly about to enter the door with a beckoning look??? What were your thoughts and intentions with this particular element? What were you hoping to achieve? What effect did you hope this to have on the viewer? Is this you? What are the obvious photoshop lens flares about? The need to recreate this I have difficukty understanding ~ the inclusion of other elements confuses things further in my honest opinion.

Kind regards,

Syd

To bring some context to the reopening of this thread:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=90

OK.

Firstly I worked on both of these images for a fair bit of time. I never ran down to my local grocers shop and snapped some of the items there to idly post as my six daily for Steves.

I know where you are going with this Syd, never mind I will play along.

I had what I though was a half decent and original image, like I say after a fair amount of time and work. I originally posted to get a feeling if the shot was pleasing. If any elements were distracting, or indeed it was in actual fact a failure and boring to some people.

While I liked the originals simplicity (of course I'm biased) I also still thought it could work as an interesting background. Because I was learning more about photoshop I though it would make a good exercise in composites. Something I hadn't tried that much of before.

I picked a general image ( no it is not me ) from the web. Obviously the reason for the figure and the stance was that I felt it was conducive to the background, and would have a better chance of fitting in to this scene. ie there was a distinct story there without too much imagination. I also picked this image as I wanted to see how much of an influencing factor the sexual nature would have in making the photograph more interesting. I had previously imported other images. ie a deer into a forest scene which didn't work as well. On some of other photographic sites I visit I notice that suggestive shots/images tent to receive more attention due to the subject matter. If I had more time I would have liked to had ran a similar shot with a different character, for example a child, or a couple in order to see which imagery appealed more.

Actually I dont think she is raising her skirt from what I remember from the original. Might look like that in my image as she is quite far off.

Purely and simply the lens flare was carried across from the previous example. This was included initially as a bit of eye candy. I thought it wouldn't go amiss because there is not a strong focal point like there is with the girl in the second.

Basically Syd, it was a photoshop experiment. I was trying to successfully import one image on to another to hopefully produce a believable image.

Thats all really.

[frenchy]

Can we call a truce on this now? It's pretty depressing reading other people getting their backs up. Let's move this forum back to what it's supposed to be - a critique forum with space for a bit of a laugh too.

Please?

:-D

[E.S. Crawford]

attempting to ignore you two ( :blah, i would like to give my two p on the edit.

i much prefer the original except for the trail of smoke from the stack. other than

that, i actually like the feeling i get when i look at it. the over saturation, the pano

curves of the deck and even the sun flares, in my opinion, make the shot magical.


now the edit. once more there is the smoke smudge that distracts me. and then

i feel the magic has been leeched away from the original. i think by toning everything

down, the shot has been robbed of it's charm and feels cold and lifeless. i do

absolutely adore the seductive, suggestive feel of the girl, just not in this shot.

put her in the original, put a no smoke ban on the ferry and the great scot would be

appeased!!! :-)

[JunixRose]

On the photos: I prefer the orignal without the addition of the woman. The brightness and saturation are quite appealing to me. The flares on the left from the railings seems out of place though. The inclusion of the woman seems an odd one to me. As far the technical details are concerned I think that enough has already been said, ie tigger said it all, unless you wanted to bring the erotic nature up even further by bringing the woman more to the fore and following Ken's suggestion and turning the shadow into a reflection. Then you have a Marilyn Monroe esq tease with the possibility of a reflection without anything nearly so pornographic. I personally prefer a more organic approach to photography that doesn't add alien elements to the composition. The woman in a fancy dress simply seems out of place on the ship as it doesn't appear to be a cruise liner of any sort but much more industrial. My favorite element would still be the curved lines of the grid deck showing the breadth of the image. A question I have here is was this stitched or an extremely wide angle lens?

[RedRhino]

I think we forget one thing all to often.... we produce images to evoke an emotional response in people 'not for photographers'... as people who stand behind cameras we too often search for the flaws, the explanations why the shadows are wrong when in effect they often cause the 'common people' to focus their attention, to bring them into that image, forget their reality for a moment... and step into ours. Even if it is not real.

Nce work LB

Want proof... http://www.mcescher.com/

[kenmck15]

WOOW graet shot

i love the pp. great feel to the shot and the title matches so well

great stuff

ken