Beauty in the Pink

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rockshifter

Rockshifter

Messages
6,230
Name
Charles
Edit My Images
No
Hi All.
Impromptu capture while waiting to cross road while waiting for lights to change.
Very harsh sun.
Couldn't help being enchanted by this beautiful driver.
(apologies if you feel these belong in gen section, but do appreciate the quality of critique here :LOL:)

No1
PinkLadyweb.jpg


No2
car2web.jpg


No3
WomanWalkweb.jpg
 
They are pretty bad. They all look as though they were taken by a stalker in all honesty. The first two are really bad for the following reasons:

Rear view mirror and other dangly things are in the way.
You're shooting through a windscreen.
It's under exposed.
She's half in shadow.
etc.

The last one is slightly better but she looks like she's about to ram the can in her eye. Maybe wait for a better moment and use a shallower dof.
 
Hi Guys
Thanks for your views / comments.
So, you don't like them ... mmmm. Interesting.
Didn't think they would be to everyone's taste.

Garry - "Rear view mirror and other dangly things are in the way.
You're shooting through a windscreen.
It's under exposed.
She's half in shadow.
etc."
Much of what you say is true - though I thought the exposure worked fine, but all those other things all just cook the cake for me.
The last was my red herring. I totally don't like it.

Anybody else feel like sharing their thoughts.
Am I the only one who likes the first two ?
(Don't feel you have to say something positive, if you agree with Toothie and Garry say so.)
 
Don't like them sorry. The first is really a snapshot of some girl through her car window. The pink thing is distracting.
 
IMO

The good...

They're sharp.
The exposure is fine in my eyes
The first 2 have an almost film look to them, I'd play with the contrast more and see what happens.

The bad...

OK the 3rd one really is pretty dull to look at
The first two aren't that interesting either.

I think the main problem is that you've captured subjects with no story. Had the girl in her car been dancing about singing or doing something there would have been some interest. The 3rd, well there's really nothing happening.

Just my 2p

Pete
 
You do have to wonder what the Beauty in the Pink would look like with the make up scraped off! Would be a good shot if it wasn't for the rear view mirror.
 
She's stunning. One of the most attractive girls I've ever seen. :love:
 
Kryptix said:
She's stunning. One of the most attractive girls I've ever seen. :love:
Click to expand...
if you find that driver ^^^^^^^ stunning Kryptix, you probably think Paris Hilton IS THE MOST attractive girl you've ever seen :D

and sorry Rockshifter, but neither of the photos interest me. the first two are to dark and too busy or cluttered and your red herring, is just that - plain boring.
 
Last edited:
vodka said:
if you find that driver ^^^^^^^ stunning Kryptix, you probably think Paris Hilton IS THE MOST attractive girl you've ever seen :D
Click to expand...
Not at all. She looks like a decent girl, and very well presented -- she's extremely pretty. She's wearing make-up but nothing OTT. She's nothing like Paris.

What type of girl do you find attractive? :bang:
 
icecavern said:
IMO

The good...

They're sharp.
The exposure is fine in my eyes
The first 2 have an almost film look to them, I'd play with the contrast more and see what happens.

The bad...

OK the 3rd one really is pretty dull to look at
The first two aren't that interesting either.

I think the main problem is that you've captured subjects with no story. Had the girl in her car been dancing about singing or doing something there would have been some interest. The 3rd, well there's really nothing happening.

Just my 2p

Pete
Click to expand...

She is pretty and therefore captivating so perhaps you can't help but think what's she's thinking off where she's going...No?
 
Kryptix said:
Not at all. She looks like a decent girl, and very well presented -- she's extremely pretty. She's wearing make-up but nothing OTT. She's nothing like Paris.

What type of girl do you find attractive? :bang:
Click to expand...

take of your blinkers Kryptix, she's everything like Paris. her make-up is so heavy, it may crack if she smiles and the only difference is the girl's hair above, it's coarse which is probably from been a bottle blonde for too long. either that or split ends overloaded.

as for my preference in women, i prefer mysterious brunettes ;)
 
Last edited:
ldwallis said:
stalkerish? I think not, if he hadn't said everyone would of thought these were set up.
Click to expand...

Honestly? I don't think so.

You do know that a lot of diCorcia's work wasn't staged or set up, he just has that skill of making the everyday look like a scene from a movie.
 
Last edited:
Bloody hell.
First not a bite, then wham !

Cheers all for comments.
Even if most found pic poor, glad you liked the gal - especially Kryptix.
Obviously a man of outstanding taste.
Paris H is not in the same ball park as this stunner.
Make-up is on a little light PP - no Photoshop with this gal.
Look at the eye - WoW !!!
This chic is hot, hot, hot.
 
Rockshifter said:
Bloody hell.
First not a bite, then wham !

Cheers all for comments.
Even if most found pic poor, glad you liked the gal - especially Kryptix.
Obviously a man of outstanding taste.
Paris H is not in the same ball park as this stunner.
Make-up is on a little light PP - no Photoshop with this gal.
Look at the eye - WoW !!!
This chic is hot, hot, hot.
Click to expand...
There's so many strange people on this forum. By his judgement, any blonde-girl that wears make-up looks like Paris Hilton. That's a large percentage of girls. The girl looks classy and I'm normally quite a good judge of character -- I'd say she's quite innocent too, and absolutely nothing like Paris Hilton.

You keep at it mate. It's far better then so many shots I've seen on here, where someone takes a pic of a plain, boring field and receives pages and pages of compliments when it looks like he took it with his 1mp phone camera. :shrug:
 
Cheers Kryptix.

I'm off to rummage about in the bin before it's emptied and get my camera back :LOL:
 
I would never take a photo like the one of the girl in the car and if I ever did then I would certainly never admit to it on a photography forum. It's photos like this that make people worried in the street when they see someone holding a camera. Sorry, but these are the kind of images that pervs should keep to themselves. She's attractive, you'd notice her as she drove by but taking a snap shot to remember her by, and a bad snap shot at that, it's not what I'd call street photography and certainly not a portrait.
 
-Rob- said:
I would never take a photo like the one of the girl in the car and if I ever did then I would certainly never admit to it on a photography forum. It's photos like this that make people worried in the street when they see someone holding a camera. Sorry, but these are the kind of images that pervs should keep to themselves. She's attractive, you'd notice her as she drove by but taking a snap shot to remember her by, and a bad snap shot at that, it's not what I'd call street photography and certainly not a portrait.
Click to expand...
:thinking:

So what's the difference from taking a picture of anyone in public that you haven't asked permission for then?

There's tons of threads in this section of people randomly taking pictures of people on the street without them being aware. What's the difference in taking a picture of an old man drinking tea at a café and a female sitting in her car? Clearly he's not a perv as he posted the image on a photography forum looking for opinions on the capture, just like everyone else does when they capture random people in the street.

Oh, and in your opinion it's a bad snap shot -- I thought it was quite good myself.

EDIT: I've just looked through your My 52 Photos for 2009 thread and now I'm honestly baffled how you can criticise his photography. Almost everyone of your shots are too soft, slightly out of focus and put simply, of no better quality than his. I'm not saying that you're an awful photographer but for someone who just slated his work, I kind of expected something at least slightly special.
 
Last edited:
-Rob- said:
these are the kind of images that pervs should keep to themselves
Click to expand...

Who the hell do you think you are, coming on here and calling me a perv because I took a snap of a beautiful girl in a car waiting for the lights to change.
Had it been a pic of an old man / woman, would that also qualify me as a perv too ?

You are one he** of a sick idiot.
It is people like you who should think before spouting a load of *****.
No wonder people can't go about their lawful business of taking photos in public places.

Bu**er off and take a reality check !
 
Back to the photos; they're not great.

Taking #1:

Good points; the light is interesting, the shape on her face revealing one eye is nice. Exposure is fine, the midtones just need picking up a bit.

Bad points; as said earlier.. nothing much going on, tax disc / pink thing are distracting, and the general composition isn't great.

As for Idwallis comparing it to diCorcia.. Umm, there's glass/Perspex in both shots, and a person I guess.

And -Rob-, don't be silly.

Jamie.
 
Personally, I feel the difference between a pic like this and one of a stranger in the street, is that this girl is in her own personal space, which some feel should be private.
It comes across as less of street togging and more like a 'pap shot to me'

However can we keep the thread on track and refrain from name calling and personal attacks please... otherwise it will sadly result in this :lock:
 
Rob said:
I would never take a photo like the one of the girl in the car and if I ever did then I would certainly never admit to it on a photography forum. It's photos like this that make people worried in the street when they see someone holding a camera. Sorry, but these are the kind of images that pervs should keep to themselves. She's attractive, you'd notice her as she drove by but taking a snap shot to remember her by, and a bad snap shot at that, it's not what I'd call street photography and certainly not a portrait.
Click to expand...

Bit harsh Rob, bring the word pervs into it didnt do your argument any favours.

Kryptix said:
:thinking:

So what's the difference from taking a picture of anyone in public that you haven't asked permission for then?

There's tons of threads in this section of people randomly taking pictures of people on the street without them being aware. What's the difference in taking a picture of an old man drinking tea at a café and a female sitting in her car? Clearly he's not a perv as he posted the image on a photography forum looking for opinions on the capture, just like everyone else does when they capture random people in the street.

Oh, and in your opinion it's a bad snap shot -- I thought it was quite good myself.

EDIT: I've just looked through your My 52 Photos for 2009 thread and now I'm honestly baffled how you can criticise his photography. Almost everyone of your shots are too soft, slightly out of focus and put simply, of no better quality than his. I'm not saying that you're an awful photographer but for someone who just slated his work, I kind of expected something at least slightly special.
Click to expand...

You are on thin ice, you are already on the watch list for some dodgy comments, Rob might not agree but he IS entitled to his opinion, You are just picking holes in his work because he doesnt agree with you.

Rockshifter said:
Who the hell do you think you are, coming on here and calling me a perv because I took a snap of a beautiful girl in a car waiting for the lights to change.
Had it been a pic of an old man / woman, would that also qualify me as a perv too ?

You are one he** of a sick idiot.
It is people like you who should think before spouting a load of *****.
No wonder people can't go about their lawful business of taking photos in public places.

Bu**er off and take a reality check !
Click to expand...

calm down Rockshifter, Rob might not have worded his post well but there is no need to get so defensive.

i suggest everyone steps back from this one and has a little think about it.
 
bah@ mods who only type short warnings..
 
Matty

"calm down Rockshifter, Rob might not have worded his post well but there is no need to get so defensive."

I think someone calling you a perv on a public forum is something to get defensive about.
 
jedimaster said:
call me strange (and you probably will) I like no3
to me it portrays exactly what street photography is about
it's natural, its unposed its just life as it happens

well that's my opinion anyway
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
ldwallis said:
stalkerish? I think not, if he hadn't said everyone would of thought these were set up.
really reminds me of Philip-Lorca diCorcia, for example this image...

philipdelorca1.jpg


well done
Click to expand...

Sorry about not getting back earlier. I hadn't heard of Philip-Lorca diCorcia before so checked him out. Biographically we have a lot in common and some of his shots do look similar to mine, although, of course, his aren't quite as good :LOL:
 
Rockshifter said:
Hi Guys
Thanks for your views / comments.
So, you don't like them ... mmmm. Interesting.
Didn't think they would be to everyone's taste.
Am I the only one who likes the first two ?
(Don't feel you have to say something positive, if you agree with Toothie and Garry say so.)
Click to expand...

They're not to my taste and I think that came across clearly in my post. I ddin't have anything positive to say about the pictures but you actively encouraged people to post even if it's not positive. I stand by what I said.

Kryptix said:
EDIT: I've just looked through your My 52 Photos for 2009 thread and now I'm honestly baffled how you can criticise his photography. Almost everyone of your shots are too soft, slightly out of focus and put simply, of no better quality than his. I'm not saying that you're an awful photographer but for someone who just slated his work, I kind of expected something at least slightly special.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your comments. I will take them on board and try and improve in the future. I noticed you didn't actually take the time to comment within my '52' thread, is that because you are being deliberately vindictive because you don't like the comments I made? It seems strange that no one else has pointed out the same comments that you made but if they did then I'd be happy to accept it. I will also try and remember that anyone saying anything negative about anyone's photos must be able to produce 'special' photos themselves. If they are the new rules this this is going to become a very quiet forum.
 
Last edited:
Well Rob
I did invite comments / crit, good or bad. That is not my issue.
I do object to being called a perv.
Do you have some kind of visual / mental block on my post in reply to your personal attack. If so here it is again.

Rockshifter said:
Who the hell do you think you are, coming on here and calling me a perv because I took a snap of a beautiful girl in a car waiting for the lights to change.
Had it been a pic of an old man / woman, would that also qualify me as a perv too ?

You are one he** of a sick idiot.
It is people like you who should think before spouting a load of *****.
No wonder people can't go about their lawful business of taking photos in public places.

Bu**er off and take a reality check !
Click to expand...
 
Rockshifter said:
Well Rob
I did invite comments / crit, good or bad. That is not my issue.
I do object to being called a perv.
Do you have some kind of visual / mental block on my post in reply to your personal attack. If so here it is again.
Click to expand...

TBH your post is more of a personal attack than his was.
 
InaGlo said:
Personally, I feel the difference between a pic like this and one of a stranger in the street, is that this girl is in her own personal space, which some feel should be private.
It comes across as less of street togging and more like a 'pap shot to me'

However can we keep the thread on track and refrain from name calling and personal attacks please... otherwise it will sadly result in this :lock:
Click to expand...

I disagree.
If someone is in a public place, then they are fair game.
Being in a car is irrelevant. They are in the public view.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top