Sarah - herself
That ^^^ means no flashy logos or daft graphics please!!
This was like, shot number three of Sarah I think. (I could check, but it means digging out an external hard drive, and I'm lazy!) Big kudos to Kate again for the makeup, because frankly, she does look stunning, but also big thumbs up to Sarah, for just dropping straight into it.
Regular viewers will maybe remember that what Sarah's playing with here is her lip piercing, which somewhat strangely has caused a lot of mixed opinions. One particular haunt online where I posted a few of her shots drew a major reaction, essentially stating that model photography should be all about making her and the picture look beautiful, and that the piercing was a disfigurement of that.
This has made me think a lot about it over the last few weeks. And I think I've come to the conclusion that this definiton of model photos is a bit blinkered. I could maybe understand the viewpoint if these were commercial photos for a fashion magazine or something like that, but even then, there's gonna be some 'alt' magazine somewhere that would eat up the idea of a lip piercing causing a bit of a 'to do'. The fact is though, that these photos (all of these of late) aren't in any way, shape or form meant to be commercial. They're designed to toy with the boundaries, as that's part of the premise of the book.
So the book, meant to be (as the constantly evolving and refining definiton becomes) 100 people, showing them as they are. Showing how they choose to be, what's under the surface and what makes them tick. Showing some reality. But painting, or trying to anyway, it all over a multitude of styles. So in some cases, I hope to, and expect to shoot someone in a way which looks commercial fashion, but to actually take the photo showing something that screws with that ideal. Or another version, to shoot a fine art nude, but make it unflattering say, or to actually not try and show lots of bums and boobs.
And as I've thought about this, I realised something. If these pictures are causing arguments (if you can call them that) then maybe I'm doing something right? (And then the paranoia and deep lack of self-confidence kicks in, and I wonder if I just concocted that thought in my head to flatter myself, and the pictures are inherantly failing.) (And then I try and stop the voices in my head and go to make a cup of tea...)
(Strobist/flash info: 580EX II fired into orbis ringlight at 1/2 power, triggered via Cybersyncs.)
Sarah - herself
That ^^^ means no flashy logos or daft graphics please!!
This was like, shot number three of Sarah I think. (I could check, but it means digging out an external hard drive, and I'm lazy!) Big kudos to Kate again for the makeup, because frankly, she does look stunning, but also big thumbs up to Sarah, for just dropping straight into it.
Regular viewers will maybe remember that what Sarah's playing with here is her lip piercing, which somewhat strangely has caused a lot of mixed opinions. One particular haunt online where I posted a few of her shots drew a major reaction, essentially stating that model photography should be all about making her and the picture look beautiful, and that the piercing was a disfigurement of that.
This has made me think a lot about it over the last few weeks. And I think I've come to the conclusion that this definiton of model photos is a bit blinkered. I could maybe understand the viewpoint if these were commercial photos for a fashion magazine or something like that, but even then, there's gonna be some 'alt' magazine somewhere that would eat up the idea of a lip piercing causing a bit of a 'to do'. The fact is though, that these photos (all of these of late) aren't in any way, shape or form meant to be commercial. They're designed to toy with the boundaries, as that's part of the premise of the book.
So the book, meant to be (as the constantly evolving and refining definiton becomes) 100 people, showing them as they are. Showing how they choose to be, what's under the surface and what makes them tick. Showing some reality. But painting, or trying to anyway, it all over a multitude of styles. So in some cases, I hope to, and expect to shoot someone in a way which looks commercial fashion, but to actually take the photo showing something that screws with that ideal. Or another version, to shoot a fine art nude, but make it unflattering say, or to actually not try and show lots of bums and boobs.
And as I've thought about this, I realised something. If these pictures are causing arguments (if you can call them that) then maybe I'm doing something right? (And then the paranoia and deep lack of self-confidence kicks in, and I wonder if I just concocted that thought in my head to flatter myself, and the pictures are inherantly failing.) (And then I try and stop the voices in my head and go to make a cup of tea...)
(Strobist/flash info: 580EX II fired into orbis ringlight at 1/2 power, triggered via Cybersyncs.)