Glamour comments!

You better believe it, I'm still confused.

I agree with CharlesU's suggestions in principle but have reservations.

I am a relative newbie.
Before I can really critique my own work effectively I look at other peoples' work and critique it (usually in my own mind!) and observe other peoples' critiques, all as part of the learning process.
You have to learn to critique as well as shoot!

I admire CharlesU's work immensely and try to avoid the bland 'nice shot' critiques.
Sometimes (very rarely) I'll spot something that jumps out at me that maybe someone has missed or had a valid reason for and I would want to know why they did that.
I would feel very intimidated critiquing the work of someone like CharlesU and would be put off contributing if I were expected to show my own work as it isn't in the same league.

What I would always try to do however is make balanced comments ie: praise and critical comments/questions...

and of course contain the comments relevant to the image!

CharlesU..don't think about following Van Goghs' example of cutting your ear off..it plays havoc with your sunglasses

Everyone has opinions. Everyone certainly has the right (at least where I live) to express them. Some are just more meaningful than others.

Show me a critique by someone who knows what they are doing and the odds of it being valuable go up considerably. Show me an example, and the chances of my really learning from it increase even more.

bachscuttler wrote:
I agree with CharlesU's suggestions in principle but have reservations.

I am a relative newbie.
Before I can really critique my own work effectively I look at other peoples' work and critique it (usually in my own mind!) and observe other peoples' critiques, all as part of the learning process.
You have to learn to critique as well as shoot!

I admire CharlesU's work immensely and try to avoid the bland 'nice shot' critiques.
Sometimes (very rarely) I'll spot something that jumps out at me that maybe someone has missed or had a valid reason for and I would want to know why they did that.
I would feel very intimidated critiquing the work of someone like CharlesU and would be put off contributing if I were expected to show my own work as it isn't in the same league.

What I would always try to do however is make balanced comments ie: praise and critical comments/questions...

and of course contain the comments relevant to the image!

CharlesU..don't think about following Van Goghs' example of cutting your ear off..it plays havoc with your sunglasses

Thanks for the comments. Don't hold up questions or commentary. Not my point at all. Really, what I am talking about are the naysayers who simply point out what is wrong but never showing how it should be done or really teaching anything. Every forum has them. Nothing measures up to their standards and they rarely, if ever, post anything meaningful themselves.

Critiquing, even to yourself, is a great way to learn. I learned what I know of lighting by trying to dissect images. If you have questions, ask them!!

I find this thread interesting...
One of the more thought provoking threads in awhile.

However, I noted that someone was wondering where to find models.

Try One Model Place
www.onemodelplace.com

They have a large number of models available (like about 80,000 across the planet) Most in US, but also a fairly large number in Europe with scattered number elsewhere.

While they have a higher percentage of female models, they also have a large number of male models so something for everyone. And from my bias view it appears the male models are on average better looking then the average female model. But then I may be pickier on my selection of female models (darn het. male bias getting in the way)
Not sure how many male models will do TFP/TFCD (meaning basically free) but if they cost they tend to cost far less then female models (supply and demand at work - at least I hope that is all it is).

So OMP is probably the best source for finding models in your area and then you will be able to get in some practice and then whine that your lighting needs work, your lenses aren't good enough, find you need to learn hair and makeup (even for male models), need to work on your people directing skills and learn that it is way more work then it looks. On the other hand if you do it with the sole purpose of having fun with your photography then you win and that is all that really matters.

Everything below this point is a bit rambly and may be slightly off topic....
...............
BTW: my OMP photographer # is #8493 some of my best work ends up on that page. And I keep trying to figure out what I need to do to get my pictures selected for the gallery section of the site (can't remember the term they use and can't access site at work). Now that is a challenge. I have noted they tend to like, what to me are, clean backgrounds that are over saturated in a boring pose and PS'd into art work and no longer photography; but still I try to get at least one that makes it. At least CharlesU has a few that have been selected (which were all outstanding photos BTW) even if I note that he shot one of the same models I did and personally I think I got better pictures of her. We have shot at least 2 of the same models, but being as my memory is faulty at the moment all I can think of is Gina, Julie, Renee and Savannah (of which only 2 count). He did a far better job then me on the other, but I claim early lack of experience on that one.

When this month is over and I start having a little more time I will try to get some of my work up for critique for the fun of it. Between this month and last I have or am taking a total of 7 flights, including a 9 day one at the end of the month. I think I have an interesting mix in that I have my models in both warrior get up and then in submissive outfits/poses. Somewhat strangely more then half prefer (or expect) the submissive poses and get tired of the carrying the weapons. I like the dual aspects and try to represent my models in both ways. This may be saying something about me, but would require a very long thread even by my standards to explain it correctly.

Just me,

Wow, great thread, I have a lot to say on the subject, as I think I have received more than my fair share of negative comments.

Let me say, I have become a much better photographer because of the constructive comments and critiques I have received, but I have really had to filter out the negatives to get good information. Most of the time I can deal with the guy expressing his lust at some model (my wife usually), at least it means it was a good image to him. What makes me mad are the insults to how a model looks, usually it is about her physique being too manly or some steroid comment.

I did have to laugh, one of the guys in this thread refered to glam section only in regards to women, never once mentioning guys. I think men can take some glamorous pics too and this same poster is one who made rude comments about my wife. I guess for some folks, they only can deal with seeing what they consider attractive.

Noni, great posts, you make some good points. I too really enjoyed bluelens' male nudes, they were of exceptional quality I thought and made good art.

Charles, I agree with you.....I would love to see a negative poster put up his/her's own work, lets see what they got.

THANKS!!! to all who have offered me advice and critiques. Please keep it up.

I like the first shot a lot.

I have to be honest, though. There are few things more unattractive to me than a muscle bound woman who is, otherwise, quite attractive. I know guys who don't have the legs that are seen in shots #3 & #4.

But I like the first shot a lot...

Steve

Let's keep the comments on the photography and not on your taste in women.

Well, Charles, "glamour" is something different to different people, is it not? If we're not going to discuss the subject contained in a "glamour" photograph, one might as well be taking "glamour" photographs of Triscuit boxes.

Is it an unfair assumption that an unglamorous subject can cause an otherwise good shot to be unglamourous, as well? Why do you use beautiful women in your shoots instead of overweight women with bad teeth?

Well, that would be unglamourous, correct?

Perhaps I could've worded my response differently, but the point would have remained the same...

Steve

I do agree with you in all points... the subject matters, especially if it's suposed to be a glamour shot.

In the pictures I think the location is amazing, the lady alas, is not glamourous, far from it!! A beautiful model with more attractive shapes and with more sex-appeal would have made the diffrence and the shot would have looked glamorous!

To criticise the photograph without mentioning if the subject is right or not would mean not to criticise the photograph at all, if it's galmour we are talking about!!

Perhaps I could've worded my response differently, but the point would have remained the same...

i'm with you two on this one!!

I agree with your disagreement. If I post a photo of something, and people comment it I would not expect everyone to post a photo which shows as example why the comment is valid and how the better photo would look like. Words are enough if thoughts behind them are sane well and have content.

Problem is: I do not shoot glamour, so does that make me invalid to comment glamour shots?

So someone shouldn't make a negative comment unless they provide a sample of their own work?

How silly.

I don't have the facility for doing glamour shots. I don't have the lighting, the studio (or an acceptable environment), and I don't have the models. Does that mean I should avoid providing a comment if it's going to be negative?

If I see something in an image which I have a criticism with, I will share it, be it something about the lighting, shadows, or even the subject of the shot. That's the point of a "critique" forum, is it not?

To suggest that one be prepared to provide an example of work after a negative comment is, like I said, silly...

Steve

I'm always amazed at how in all of Nat's posts a good portion of the responses are about Samantha's body and not the shot. To all who don't care for this type of model, there's an easy fix-don't look. We all know who Nat is shooting, so if you see his name on a post, skip it and go to the next. If you feel the need to check out the shots anyway, keep your opinions to yourself. This is the man's wife you're talking about, after all. Show a little respect.
Nat, keep 'em coming.

No, Pekka. It doesn't make your comment invalid. What *I* said earlier in this thread and what I think most people would agree on is that some opinions may carry more weight.

Think of it this way. Someone who has NO website experience other than cruising and who really doesn't understand IP, nets, or HTML (even in theory) cruises by your website and offers comments like. Man, your color scheme stinks. Your page is really slow to load. What's with the light fonts on the light background? Hey, your layout isn't efficient or practical. Etc....

He has opinions. They are "valid". But maybe this opinions just aren't that relevant. Maybe your web page is way better than he is giving you credit for? Maybe it would help if he showed you how to get your pages to load faster, or to improve your layout. What if he pointed you to better forum management software? Etc. (By the way, I am NOT picking on POTN, just trying to draw a parallel.)

I also suggested that if you can post an example, it's even better. Much easier to learn from an example image than just a description.

From what I am seeing here, most of the negative comoments, not all but most, are simply negative comments. No real attempt to educate or assist.

Why not try and raise the bar? I'm not saying make posting an example a rule. But it should be a common occurence.