Portrait Critique wanted

Portrait Critique wanted

Here are two photos I’ve taken. One was taken about 4 years ago and one was taken recently. The one taken 4 years ago was re-edited recently with my new found photoshop techniques.

Without looking at the exif files and although different subjects. Do you seen an improvement on the photography at all? I’ll post a photo of the older photo later of how I used to edit the photos.
Just struggling a little bit here on finding my creative flavor and for the past year as a gear collector, I’ve switched gears, lens and lighting quite a few times.
I’ve learnt besides having a proper great team of hair stylists, hair, wardrobe and make up, editing the images (maybe it’s a bit too cooked) is the only thing that’s making a difference.

I keep going back to the forest to take my photos because of the scene. I keep using more telephoto lens as I’m not as comfortable with my images using wider lens like a 35mm.

Just some random thoughts of the day.

Thank-you for looking
Ray
C&C Welcomed.
Image 1

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/GWQs​QK

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Hof6​gU

I don't see much difference. That might be a good thing.

As for those images, I prefer the first one: it has a more natural pose. The posing in #2 isn't quite there, with the right shoe pointing into the frame.

I'm no portrait photographer so I have no detailed comments for you sorry - though I do agree about the shoe thing. I think they're both very good otherwise!

LOL I also like the first one better. The girl looks so out of place on the second one. (deep in the woods in a short dress and with heels on??)

both are well lit, and well executed, and while not wild about the pose in #2, I know fashion has it's own rules.

they both look great! I like the first one better though.

I like both, the processing is well done.

Only thing I would change on #2 is to crop in a bit to put her eyes on the top third of the image. To much dead space above her, but keep it a full length.

I thought the bokeh looked OK, but not stellar on the first. Then looked at the lens and thought - Hmm, how about a 'real' portrait lens.

Then I looked at the second image and thought, Hmm, that looks better, maybe the BG isn't quite as busy. Then I looked at the lens. At first I thought it was the 200 f2.8 and thought, yup, even that made a difference. Then I looked again.

I think the second one would have been better if she had lost the shoes entirely. Barefoot in such a beautiful setting would be significantly more striking.

Minus the issues already mentioned, both images look good to me. I think its difficult, if not impossible, to determine if your editing has improved from looking at only one photo from each time-point.

I don't like the bright foliage bokeh of the first pic, it's very distracting. And in the second picture, her feet are pointed in an awkward angle. But those are just nitpick critiques, both images are very well done.