# fine art nudes



## doziergraphic (Dec 30, 2010)

sorry, but can those be posted here? I had a pretty awesome shoot today. Came away with over 500 shots, and some 'interesting' ones to say the least. No 'Hustler' type shots, all artsy with just a little skin here and there.

Below is one of my favs from the day - (nothing showing that shouldn't be) - does this work better in black and white below?

this is the jpeg that came straight out of the shoot, won't be editing for a couple days, so just did a quick once over for the black and white.

Interestingly, the wall is the same color throughout my studio (puke yellow) but kinda thinking it works here. Am I right? Or have I just been exposed to that color too long?

1. 






2.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 30, 2010)

Who ever did the tatoo's wants shooting


----------



## vtf (Dec 30, 2010)

Thank God we don't have to click on links.:thumbup:
I prefer the B&W, the yellowish tent doesnt do it for me.
Looking forward to seeing more.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 30, 2010)

The face and the hands speak male/shemale to me, which I can do without, the rest of you need to pay attention. Very Freaky.


----------



## Darkhunter139 (Dec 30, 2010)

No they cant be posted here.  They use to be allowed but that rule changed several months ago.  (the ones you posted are probably fine though)


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 30, 2010)

So. Where's the fine art?


----------



## Karri (Dec 30, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> So. Where's the fine art?


 
LOL!  That's the same thing I just asked my hubby...


----------



## vtf (Dec 30, 2010)

GeorgieGirl said:


> The face and the hands speak male/shemale to me, which I can do without, the rest of you need to pay attention. Very Freaky.


 Have you ever seen Seinfeld?


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 30, 2010)

Does it matter for this?:crazy:


----------



## doziergraphic (Dec 30, 2010)

vtf said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > The face and the hands speak male/shemale to me, which I can do without, the rest of you need to pay attention. Very Freaky.
> ...



Not really sure I can do much about her looks, but I have seen her pregnant ... twice (as you can see if you look close enough.) So I'm pretty sure that's all been verified.

sooo ... any thoughts about the attempt at the window light?


----------



## Genka81 (Dec 30, 2010)

Karri said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > So. Where's the fine art?
> ...



I asked my hubby the same thing, too.  We both don't see it as fine art, but nice try.


----------



## mrshaleyberg (Dec 30, 2010)

GeorgieGirl said:


> The face and the hands speak male/shemale to me, which I can do without, the rest of you need to pay attention. Very Freaky.



wow:shock:


----------



## gsgary (Dec 31, 2010)

erose86 said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Who ever did the tatoo's wants shooting
> ...




Worst tats i have ever seen


----------



## ghache (Dec 31, 2010)

you guy are ***s, its not the greatest picture ever but she doesnt look like a "shemale" wtf?


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 31, 2010)

Look, I am going to say sorry right now to conclude the wrong turn. So Dozier, I aplogize if I have insulted you on a personal level. It was not my intention to do so.

I will now probably negate that apology, for some, by saying that, IMO, if anyone posts photos here of friends or loved ones they do run the risk of some sort of unintended hurt pangs that are not necessarily intented to be personal attacks but can feel as though they are.

I have recently viewed and/or commented on Dozier's work with his models and his lighting set ups. I have made my comments on this most reent effort to the dismay of some, and those are my impressions on the subject. 

If the actual persona of the subject is that distinctly different from my impression, then Lesson Learned for lighting to a best improvement for a subject rather than one that casts them in a bad light.

Again Dozier, I aplogize to you for any hurt I have created as a result of my comments.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 31, 2010)

ghache said:


> you guy are ***s, its not the greatest picture ever but she doesnt look like a "shemale" wtf?



and the constant use of 'wtf' is rediculous. learn some language skills. :cyclops:


----------



## ghache (Dec 31, 2010)

GeorgieGirl said:


> ghache said:
> 
> 
> > you guy are ***s, its not the greatest picture ever but she doesnt look like a "shemale" wtf?
> ...


 

OREALLY? 

I am curious to see you half naked :lmao:


----------



## ghache (Dec 31, 2010)

erose86 said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > erose86 said:
> ...


 
YOU WILL BE PUNISHED.







or







YOU CHOOSE


----------



## Bram (Dec 31, 2010)

Dude wtf? What is so artsy about closing the blinds halfway? I agree IT looks like it has a 5 o'clock shadow bro.


----------



## Bram (Dec 31, 2010)

@ erose, you know what that is actually a good decision considering the "nun" has both the cross and the ruler. I'll also take the rubber bands to the face for $500.


----------



## doziergraphic (Dec 31, 2010)

Doesn't offend me in the slightest. Honestly, and don't mean to turn this around, but let's face it, I understand when I post here, it's open for major ripping from other amateurs. I reserve the same right to rip/critique others' photos as well. And my opinion is certainly not coming from someone who knows what the hell he's talking about - and that's the way I take criticism from others here. Again, no offense, but isn't that the way most of you feel too? 

SHE isn't a girlfriend, cousin, sister, (brother - for those of you convinced about the gender) or anything else other than an 'entertainer' that I've known for a few years who saw my pics and wanted some done. She loved the results. 

I did get some helpful info though - like my fault for not trying to 'hide' or light her 'not so feminine' features in a better way. So next time that will be my focus on similar subject.

Will I be using these in any 'promotional' items - NO! Did I get a chance to learn and play more with my lighting - YES!



Bram said:


> Dude wtf? What is so artsy about closing the blinds halfway? I agree IT looks like it has a 5 o'clock shadow bro.



I agree it's not as artsy as the Christmas trees or water drops (sigh) that you posted on your flickr page, but I had fun with it!


----------



## Bram (Dec 31, 2010)

doziergraphic said:


> Bram said:
> 
> 
> > Dude wtf? What is so artsy about closing the blinds halfway? I agree IT looks like it has a 5 o'clock shadow bro.
> ...


 
Good call but I don't post a shemale asking for critique on something you call artsy nudes. Get real. I ask for certain critique on a completely different aspect of photography. Hope you're not sore.


----------



## doziergraphic (Dec 31, 2010)

The point I was trying to make is I'm NOT offended or sore. I asked about the lighting, wall color, and if a shot like this works in black and white. Your critique that it's not art, or it doesn't work for you is fine, and feedback I'm looking for.

But it's always fun to look at the feedback people give here, then look at the photos THEY post to put it all in perspective. Looking at your Flickr page just helped put your comments into perspective. Hope YOU'RE not sore!

I personally have seen some dogs on here that are sisters, cousins, wifes, etc of posters, but I would NEVER consider ripping their looks. But this is a forum board and tacky/immature responses are not only expected, but part of the fun. You just have to be able to give AND receive. I'm good with that!


----------



## jake337 (Dec 31, 2010)

If your serious about fine art nudes or learning more about them i would walk away from this forum.

try openphotographyforums

great forum


----------



## Bram (Dec 31, 2010)

Oh no I completely understand, the point I was trying to make is that i;m not asking for critique on "tacky" photos. I'll ask for critique about the Focus, about the Exposure, and the Color of my drops, and then the tree. I thougth the tree looked cool and it was the holidays so i posted it.

Also try photographyonthenet doubt they will take this seriously though.


----------



## jake337 (Dec 31, 2010)

The key point to be made is that even a very manly woman can be made to seem very feminine with photography.  Proper use of lighting, and posing makes HUUUGGGEEE differences.  I am a beginner so I can't tell you but maybe someone can lead you in the right direction if you are serious about fine art nudes, which lighting and posing become even more important than everyday clothes-on portrait shooting.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Dec 31, 2010)

GeorgieGirl said:


> The face and the hands speak male/shemale to me, which I can do without, the rest of you need to pay attention. Very Freaky.



My first thought 



Bitter Jeweler said:


> So. Where's the fine art?



and my second :lmao:


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Dec 31, 2010)

jake337 said:


> The key point to be made is that even a very manly woman can be made to seem very feminine with photography.  Proper use of lighting, and posing makes HUUUGGGEEE differences.  I am a beginner so I can't tell you but maybe someone can lead you in the right direction if you are serious about fine art nudes, which lighting and posing become even more important than everyday clothes-on portrait shooting.



Very true. To some extent.

And I'm not saying this is the case here because I don't know the woman but some people (yeah, btw, it is not just women) will never make a good photo. One good reason why I will never do any retail photo again.


----------



## wtdeane (Dec 31, 2010)

GeorgieGirl said:


> ghache said:
> 
> 
> > you guy are ***s, its not the greatest picture ever but she doesnt look like a "shemale" wtf?
> ...



Oh dude.  You just slammed someone's language skills and misspelled ridiculous when doing so?  Dude..... <sigh>

-1 for cocky retort fail.


----------



## Bram (Dec 31, 2010)

^^^ ZING! ^^^


----------



## jake337 (Dec 31, 2010)

c.cloudwalker said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > The key point to be made is that even a very manly woman can be made to seem very feminine with photography. Proper use of lighting, and posing makes HUUUGGGEEE differences. I am a beginner so I can't tell you but maybe someone can lead you in the right direction if you are serious about fine art nudes, which lighting and posing become even more important than everyday clothes-on portrait shooting.
> ...


 
Do you turn down not so pretty women who want your services?

Ok, but if a not so pretty woman is paying you money to take their picture you better damn well know how to make her look her best.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Dec 31, 2010)

A few thoughts on the OP (the post, not the person).

-I think B&W works better than color, but only because the white balance is off. With better WB, I think I would like the color more. 
-The way the legs are posed that there is just one leg shadow isn't good. If you reversed the pose so the the viewer's left leg was forwards, it would have kept the shadows seperate, which I think would look better. 
-I think the light is too hard in general.
-You mention coming away with over 500 shots. But don't think like that, I think people get too wrapped up in how many pictures they took, as if that has anything to do with how many good ones there are. You see it all the time with wedding photographers that say thing like, "You'll get over 1500 images!". They might not be any better (probably worse) than the guy who delivers 150 images, except that they deliver 1350 more images that aren't as good as the first 150. It's just more garbage. The only thing that ever matters is how many good images got made. No one cares if you shot 500 images and got 15 good ones, or if you shot 50 images and got 20 good ones. The final count is all that matters. 
-I think there is a large area between pornography and fine art nudes that mostly gets ignored. Just because something isn't full frontal nudity, doesn't mean that it's fine art.
-I have to agree with the others. She is pretty mannish. And the the hard side light and very shadowed face sure don't help. And also...
-The hand pose doesn't help either. Her hands are a bit manly to begin with, but the pose of them is no where near feminine. I understand that you're trying to cover her boobs with something, but if I saw a crop of just the chest and hands, I would think there was a guy standing behind her, groping her breasts. 

Live and learn though. Most aspects are better learned by doing them wrong first than by learning some rules and never understanding what their purpose is. 

Cheers!


----------



## doziergraphic (Dec 31, 2010)

GeneralBenson said:


> -I think B&W works better than color, but only because the white balance is off. With better WB, I think I would like the color more.
> -The way the legs are posed that there is just one leg shadow isn't good. If you reversed the pose so the the viewer's left leg was forwards, it would have kept the shadows seperate, which I think would look better.
> -I think the light is too hard in general.



The thought on this shot was I'd seen some like this (done better of course) on the net and had it in the back of my mind to try this - she was the first since I thought of the pose. It was also late in the evening, and it was a spur of the moment thing that hit me. A shot I wanted to try but didn't really prepare for, and the sun was going down quickly.

Next one will be better planned.



GeneralBenson said:


> -You mention coming away with over 500 shots. But don't think like that, I think people get too wrapped up in how many pictures they took, as if that has anything to do with how many good ones there are. You see it all the time with wedding photographers that say thing like, "You'll get over 1500 images!". They might not be any better (probably worse) than the guy who delivers 150 images, except that they deliver 1350 more images that aren't as good as the first 150. It's just more garbage. The only thing that ever matters is how many good images got made. No one cares if you shot 500 images and got 15 good ones, or if you shot 50 images and got 20 good ones. The final count is all that matters.



I'm still in the very experimental mode, so for every one pose, I probably took five shots (or more) with different focal lengths, sometimes playing with dof, etc. Told her we'd probably get about 10-15 decent shots out of it.



GeneralBenson said:


> -I have to agree with the others. She is pretty mannish. And the the hard side light and very shadowed face sure don't help. And also...
> -The hand pose doesn't help either. Her hands are a bit manly to begin with, but the pose of them is no where near feminine. I understand that you're trying to cover her boobs with something, but if I saw a crop of just the chest and hands, I would think there was a guy standing behind her, groping her breasts.



It would be very 'tacky' of me also to call her out on her looks here, but I never said I don't see the 'mannish' look she has. This is a hobby, but I've been paid by a few people (so far they're happy) and as you stated, do I turn down someone because of her looks? Like I said earlier, she was happy with the results, so NOW my issue is how do I deal with some of those features (some caused by me not lighting properly, some by nature!). 

Is it my responsibility to make her look the way I THINK she should, or throw them out there with usual editing.

I'm sure there will be more 'clients' like this, so my goal with this post was to see if anyone has suggestions on how to either avoid this in the future (other than declining the job), or how to deal with it.

And I guess my 'fine art' attempt failed. No problem, I'll keep trying. But THAT'S why I posted and asked for opinions.


----------



## reznap (Dec 31, 2010)

To the OP, sorry your photo wasn't well received.  I agree with you that a photo can be critiqued without blasting the model.  On the other hand, I don't believe you flattered her very well with the light and pose.  The shadows/light isn't flattering to the models face (mainly nose and chin) and the skin on her belly needs some post processing to smooth out.  

In my opinion, tasteful nude photos are mostly about the posing.  This isn't posed ideally... I'd look into some examples and try to copy some poses you like.  Also, I'd avoid the 'hand bra' at all costs. Different poses flatter different models.. so you'll have to probably try a few and see what works best.

Seems like a lot of work - and it's something I have no personal experience doing, but I bet it's somewhat fun anyway.  



doziergraphic said:


> Next one will be better planned.



Good attitude to have.  Good luck!


----------



## mwcfarms (Dec 31, 2010)

My thoughts on improving the photo. The body is beautiful and in her pose she has no neck and chin is prominent. You want to elongate everything. Give it some flow. I don`t think that the light is awful here but isn`t flattering to her. Straight on shots are hardly ever flattering. Good luck on your next shoot.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 31, 2010)

wtdeane said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > ghache said:
> ...



I'm not a dude. I guess you might be able to be spell-check but you sure can't interpret obvious things.


----------



## obx (Dec 31, 2010)

Darkhunter139 said:


> No they cant be posted here.  They use to be allowed but that rule changed several months ago.  (the ones you posted are probably fine though)



On a car forum that I belong to they have a Forum specifically for posting dirty pictures. Guys share photos of their wives and gf. Any thing goes on that website. Basically it goes as follow www.&$@#!$!forum.com/underground/ . Maybe the Photo forum should go underground and photographers can share any pics that they want. What do you guys/girls think????????? Are we going to see: www.thephotoforum.com/underground/   ??????????????


----------



## OrionsByte (Dec 31, 2010)

On a completely different note, dozier, I love your avatar but it's really creepy in the context of this thread. I keep seeing little Ralphie behind a camera taking these shots... :lmao:


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Dec 31, 2010)

jake337 said:


> Do you turn down not so pretty women who want your services?



Men or women. But, no, I don't turn them down. I just don't deal with this kind of photography. 





GeneralBenson said:


> I think there is a large area between pornography and fine art nudes that mostly gets ignored. Just because something isn't full frontal nudity, doesn't mean that it's fine art.



:thumbup:

The line between porn and art is very thin and moves according to people's personal perspective on life. Some of my painting work has been called porn... Not to say that your image is porn. It is not. But it is not art either in my book. Go to a bookstore and look at books of nudes. Also, here's a website where you can get some inspiration.

Fine Art Nude Photography Network - art of nude photography

Some photographers to check out are Jean Loup Sieff, David Hamilton (often considered porn in the US), Helmut Newton (one of my favorites), Herb Ritts,
Richard Avedon, Edward Weston, etc, etc. A lot of those guys were also fashion photographers and I don't think that is surprising.

Hope that helps.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 31, 2010)

c.cloudwalker said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > Fine Art Nude Photography Network - art of nude photography
> ...


----------



## doziergraphic (Dec 31, 2010)

OrionsByte said:


> On a completely different note, dozier, I love your avatar but it's really creepy in the context of this thread. I keep seeing little Ralphie behind a camera taking these shots... :lmao:



Even scarier, that's how I look behind the camera!


----------



## oldmacman (Dec 31, 2010)

doziergraphic said:


>



Here is an edit to adjust the lighting a little. I love the contrast in the actual pose vs what comes out in the shadow. I find there is a little too much space to the right of the image (meh, could be a personal thing).


----------



## reznap (Dec 31, 2010)

Drunken phototoshopping!


----------



## tevo (Dec 31, 2010)

vtf said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > The face and the hands speak male/shemale to me, which I can do without, the rest of you need to pay attention. Very Freaky.
> ...


 
LOLOL Manhands!   

I agree though.


----------



## amanda0908 (Jan 1, 2011)

vtf said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > The face and the hands speak male/shemale to me, which I can do without, the rest of you need to pay attention. Very Freaky.
> ...


 
Man hands!


----------



## tevo (Jan 1, 2011)

amanda0908 said:


> vtf said:
> 
> 
> > GeorgieGirl said:
> ...


 

I just picture the lobster scene... LOL


----------

