# Hazy self portraits- landscape orientation...



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 24, 2013)

View attachment 33650

I know some of y'all are just dying to see the top of my head, and some more of my torso, sorry to let you down  I like landscape sometimes.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jan 24, 2013)

The pose in the first looks awkward while the second just looks like a framing miscalculation.

Sorry.


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 24, 2013)

The_Traveler said:
			
		

> The pose in the first looks awkward while the second just looks like a framing miscalculation.
> 
> Sorry.



No need to be sorry! Thanks for your input. I like the compositions on both personally but value your opinion


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 24, 2013)

Sorry.. I would have to agree with Lew in a major way!


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 24, 2013)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> Sorry.. I would have to agree with Lew in a major way!



K. I think I Bc the processing is so different for me, I'm usually pretty contrasty, and I loved the hazy look to them that maybe I let the comp. slide. Or maybe it's just a difference of opinion, bc I still dig them.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 24, 2013)

_jessicalynn_ said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It isn't the hazy look I find to be a problem.. it is the framing, and the posing. You are invested.. it is YOU! We aren't!


----------



## EIngerson (Jan 24, 2013)

Please stop the duck face too. You are gorgeous......unless you have duck face.


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 24, 2013)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> It isn't the hazy look I find to be a problem.. it is the framing, and the posing. You are invested.. it is YOU! We aren't!



I said maybe since I really liked the processing I let the other components slide.  And you right, obv. I'm more invested as the shooter and subject. Your issues w the images were clearly stated and understood. No need to restate. Point taken and heard.


----------



## thetrue (Jan 24, 2013)

EIngerson said:


> Please stop the duck face too. You are gorgeous......unless you have duck face.


It's just the time we're in. I'd really like to see a nice genuine smile. You look like you'd be stunning!

OP, I have to go with Charlie and Lew. Framing seems not quite right, but the processing is just your personal choice.


----------



## jowensphoto (Jan 24, 2013)

EIngerson said:


> Please stop the duck face too. You are gorgeous......unless you have duck face.



Gosh, my thoughts exactly! 

I really like the processing. I think it works well the the colors. Agree with the comments about the composition. There are ways to do headshots in landscape, but I think you missed the mark.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 24, 2013)

A very pretty lady, but kinda' ugly photos of her!!!!


----------



## .SimO. (Jan 24, 2013)

I think with the strong definition in the cheek bones, a smile showing teeth would have been excellent.  I dig the catch light in both shots and I am not very bothered by the self-landscape shots.  The fog/mist/haze effect that I am usually fond of are ones with a lot of light or focused amounts. Check out Carey Hess Photography for an example.

Image #1 You have an Angelina look to me so having all your features in focus would have been great. I personally am not a fan of any portion of a head chopped off. The hair on the left side of the shot doesn't flow for me. I do like the pattern of that shirt though. Hair on the face.

Image #2 Wasted space on the left that doesn't offer anything to the image.  Hair on the left side of the image is smooth.  Hand placement seems forced and flexed and adds tension to the shot for me.  I like the head tilt and lighting but again, the haze effect you are creating takes away from the sharpness for me.  


These are just opinions so please don't take them harsh if that how the comments came out.


----------



## Designer (Jan 24, 2013)

I like landscape portraits too, when it is appropriate.


----------



## amolitor (Jan 24, 2013)

While I more or less agree with the other comments I find the whole thing kind of interesting.

You appear to be pretty uncomfortable in front of the camera, and the sort of hazy/faded processing feels a bit Polaroid. If you made a bunch of these portraits of different people, all looking awkward, all in this kind of tightly framed look, you might have something interesting. On the one hand it might be just straight up exploitative -- HI? FEELING AWKWARD? I WILL NOW MAKE PICTURES WHICH EMPHASIZE THAT! THX!

On the other hand it might say something about how we feel about being photographed, or perhaps how we no longer feel about being photographed in this age of Everything Is A Camera All The Time.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jan 24, 2013)

I'm back.

I don't think that it's the chopping off the head that bothers so much as much as the fact that there is lots of room on the left and right that calls attention to that and makes it seem like a mistake.
That graceful hand in the lower right is terrific.
You have a nicely symmetrical face, great eyes and cheekbones and excellent chin.

If you have any flaw in your face at all (and its a minor one) is that your upper lip isn't quite as full as the lower. A smile or a slight outpouting of the upper lip might be an attractive route to try.


----------



## thetrue (Jan 24, 2013)

amolitor said:


> On the other hand it might say something about how we feel about being photographed, or perhaps how we no longer feel about being photographed in this age of Everything Is A Camera All The Time.


That's an interesting thought. It could turn in to a nice series!


----------



## KmH (Jan 24, 2013)

"If you&#8217;re pictures aren&#8217;t good enough, you&#8217;re not close enough&#8221; &#8211; Robert Capa


----------



## Derrel (Jan 24, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> I'm back.
> 
> I don't think that it's the chopping off the head that bothers so much as much as the fact that there is lots of room on the left and right that calls attention to that and makes it seem like a mistake.
> That graceful hand in the lower right is terrific.
> ...



But I "like" all that dead, empty,unused black space...and I mean, come on man...it's a portrait, so using a landscape orientation is therefore counterculture! Why, one might even say it's expedient! Maybe, just maybe, it's even innovative--it leaves extra room for Photoshopping in other people, who simply, due to circumstances, might not have been able to be there when the piccie was snapped! And the *Duck Lips* expression is new and exciting!!! Go back through thousands and thousands and thousands of archived images from the 1840's to the 1940's to the early 21st century--the *Duck Lips* expression  is, honestly, all kidding aside--a VERY RECENT, NEW development. The *Duck Lips* expression is "new"...it truly,truly is. Hard to imagine, but we are living in an exciting time, when a new facial expression has swept the self-portrait field! I have NEVER, and I mean NEVER, seen a *Duck Lips* shot from the pre-Internet era. Not one. So, by adopting this facial expression, it does actually add a time-based clue to the self-portrait.


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 24, 2013)

Thanks for all the cc. I will take it all into consideration next time I take a self portrait.


----------



## DiskoJoe (Jan 24, 2013)

Lose the duckface.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jan 24, 2013)

DiskoJoe said:
			
		

> Lose the duckface.



Glad you chimed in to add that. I don't think it was said prior to your post.


----------



## CA_ (Jan 25, 2013)

_jessicalynn_ said:


> Thanks for all the cc. I will take it all into consideration next time I take a self portrait.



Jessica, were they cropped to this frame or are these how they were shot? Would you be interested in letting me take a swing at the RAW files? I think we have somewhat similar tastes in processing, and maybe I can give you a couple pointers? 

Also, keep doing the landscape shots, I find them to be more interesting than traditional portrait oriented framing. I love this site, the members are great, but sometimes you'll get Kmart-Photocenter type of advice. It's good advice for foundations, but don't worry if your stuff doesn't resonate with everyone. Keep being different!!


----------



## The_Traveler (Jan 25, 2013)

CA_ said:


> Also, keep doing the landscape shots, I find them to be more interesting than traditional portrait oriented framing. I love this site, the members are great, but *sometimes you'll get Kmart-Photocenter type of advic*e. It's good advice for foundations, but don't worry if your stuff doesn't resonate with everyone. Keep being different!!



I like portraits that use space interestingly also but I find that kind of remark bolded above rather passive aggressive and unpleasant.


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 26, 2013)

CA_ said:
			
		

> Jessica, were they cropped to this frame or are these how they were shot? Would you be interested in letting me take a swing at the RAW files? I think we have somewhat similar tastes in processing, and maybe I can give you a couple pointers?
> 
> Also, keep doing the landscape shots, I find them to be more interesting than traditional portrait oriented framing. I love this site, the members are great, but sometimes you'll get Kmart-Photocenter type of advice. It's good advice for foundations, but don't worry if your stuff doesn't resonate with everyone. Keep being different!!



The first one is slightly cropped but msg me your email and I'll send you the RAW files. I'd love to see what you do w them


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2013)

CA_ said:


> _jessicalynn_ said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for all the cc. I will take it all into consideration next time I take a self portrait.
> ...



You see millions of shots like these on Facebook on every MWAC Pro's page! how is THAT being different? 

I love it when an amateur tells another amateur to ignore the advice from all the long time shooters and established pro's! If you are here to learn, who are you going to listen to.. the other Amateurs? Yea.. sure.. you will learn a LOT there!


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2013)

_jessicalynn_ said:


> CA_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If you only "stick" to those that tell you what you WANT to hear... might as well be on Facebook!


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Jan 26, 2013)

We aren't arguing about feminine and masculine tilt here?  Wow!


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 26, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> We aren't arguing about feminine and masculine tilt here?  Wow!



Hahaha.. good point!


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 26, 2013)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> If you only "stick" to those that tell you what you WANT to hear... might as well be on Facebook!



You didn't see that I said thanks for the input? And I'll take the advice into consideration next time...


----------



## amolitor (Jan 26, 2013)

Pretending that landscape portraits with the top of the frame mid-forehead are "always wrong" and that "pros never do them" is ridiculous and wrong. The professionals in the mall never do them, for sure. Professionals producing specific types of portraits never do them. This makes as much sense as saying that landscapes are always wrong, and pros never do them -- the portraits-for-money guys don't shoot landscapes either, or macros, or, or, or ANYTHING except a specific kind of portrait.

HCB made an entire book of portraits, about half of which are landscape. And so on, and so on. The fact that Nadar never did it tells us a lot about Nadar, but almost nothing about portraiture.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 26, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:


> We aren't arguing about feminine and masculine tilt here?  Wow!



  Awesome, eh???

There are literally centuries' worth of guidelines in how we communicate status, power dynamics, and stature/respect/strength/vitality through the careful,studied posing of people in the visual arts...painting,sculpture,casting,drawing,photography.


----------



## terri (Jan 26, 2013)

Tone it down, Derrel.   Maybe step outside?


----------



## Derrel (Jan 26, 2013)

terri said:


> Tone it down, Derrel.   Maybe step outside?



I am very tired of repeatedly being ridiculed by a newbie on this issue...Robin brought it up...


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 26, 2013)

Robin_Usagani said:
			
		

> We aren't arguing about feminine and masculine tilt here?  Wow!



Is there Something wrong with the tilt of my head also?  I mean please, don't hold back. I must know every single thing unappealing about these 2 photos.


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 26, 2013)

Derrel said:
			
		

> Awesome, eh???
> 
> There are literally centuries' worth of guidelines in how we communicate status, power dynamics, and stature/respect/strength/vitality through the careful,studied posing of people in the visual arts...painting,sculpture,casting,drawing,photography.



Oh wait, I guess I missed something...

Do I have the authority to do this?? Here goes.

End.of.replies


----------



## thetrue (Jan 26, 2013)

No jessica, there's nothing wrong with your head tilt. Just leave it at that.


----------



## Ashlee_Duh (Jan 26, 2013)

I think it's brave for anyone to post pictures of themselves on a forum where opinions and critiques fly rampant.  However, I agree with some that the awkward facial expression of the infamous "duck lips"  makes the photo seem lackluster. I think if you had your mouth in a more natural state and slight smirk, the picture would have worked a lot better. I do like the hazy effect added to the photos though.


----------



## bvengence (Jan 26, 2013)

10/10 love it.  Contrast and light.


----------



## terri (Jan 26, 2013)

Derrel said:


> terri said:
> 
> 
> > Tone it down, Derrel.   Maybe step outside?
> ...


Are you kidding me?   It was a joke!     Lighten up.

Stay on topic, people!


----------



## CA_ (Jan 26, 2013)

cgipson1 said:


> CA_ said:
> 
> 
> > _jessicalynn_ said:
> ...




Lol right, that's why alll of the 'pros' photos all look _sooo _different from one another. 

Please don't discourage new people from trying new things and forming their own identity, and belittling other people's opinions because you label them as amateur. Share the basic and foundations of photography, and then get out of the way of people's creativity. 

The last thing photography needs is more of this I'm-a-pro elitist garbage.


----------



## CA_ (Jan 26, 2013)

cgipson1 said:


> CA_ said:
> 
> 
> > _jessicalynn_ said:
> ...







Oh yeah, and please, keep lecturing us on how pro you are, and how amateur the rest of us are. Give me a break


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 26, 2013)

CA_ said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > CA_ said:
> ...



Puffing your chest out isn't really helping the issue. All that was missing in that post was a sassy z-snap. Lol. :/

I don't mind the orientation. It's used a lot for beauty shots so it's not too out of the ordinary. But I don't really like the processing. It's also not as...unique...as some like to think, but the main reason I don't like it is...why? It doesn't add anything to the photo. It doesn't make me feel anything other than "hey, there's something smudged on the end of your lens."

The shots where I think this processing works is when it lends to the atmosphere of the photos. There isn't much of an atmosphere in these photos, though, to begin with, so it doesn't make sense


----------



## CA_ (Jan 26, 2013)

rexbobcat said:


> CA_ said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...



Haha no I didn't mean it in a chest puffing way, it just really bothers me when one person's opinions are not seen as valid because they're labeled 'amateur'. I think art and expression should be accessible to all, not just those that are deemed worthy.

And yes, I agree with your critique of the shots, there are other issues beyond the framing, and you make some pretty astute points.


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 27, 2013)

It's just an image. I take at least 100 a day.  I'm a mom of two little ones, I was just pleased I went through the effort to grab the tripod, sit on my kitchen floor, take a few selfies and get them edited. I look decent, not at all like I've gone to bed at 1 and up at 5 w the littles for the past 5 years. That's  all. But seriously that was like 4000 pics ago. Moving forward.


----------



## GrahamPhisher (Jan 27, 2013)

EIngerson said:


> Please stop the duck face too. You are gorgeous......unless you have duck face.



people think I do duckface all the time, but its just my lips....  sucks..... lol http://s20.postimage.org/evwbu83f1/image.jpg

I actually like these pics, not like their WOW but simple honest humble pics tht say a lot about one that have character in em.


----------



## Robin_Usagani (Jan 27, 2013)

Graham, you look like Sylar (Gabriel Gray) on tv series Heroes.


----------



## amolitor (Jan 27, 2013)

I posted this before, but it either got moderated out or somehow Lost In An Editing Accident or something. Hopefully it was not moderated out. I can't imaging WHY it would have been?

Anyways. images.google.com and search for:

steichen solitude

If Steichen did it, it's pretty much legit.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 27, 2013)

CA_ said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > CA_ said:
> ...



I don't get your point.. mine is a halloween portrait with some vignetting, and purposely left a little rough (you know... the halloween thing)  ..... yours was a poorly shot portrait that you then photoshopped the hell out of to make it a keeper.... You should of posted the original, not the photoshopped version.... (basically selective color!)

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/people-photography/311871-little-red-riding-hood.html#post2820853


View attachment 34101 View attachment 34103

As I have said before, you are good at photoshop... but that is it...


----------



## CA_ (Jan 27, 2013)

You don't see my point? My point is to show the irony in your condescending tone towards two amateurs exchanging ideas, when your work itself is mediocre at best. I'm so tired of "seasoned pros" looking down from their ivory towers at all of us amateurs just because we haven't been shooting since the Reagan administration.

All people want is friendly helpful advice. And if they want to try something out of the box, by God, let them. It's called finding your own identity. Sure, they're going to mess up here and there, but please, _please_, don't let your own bloated sense of self worth get in the way of someone being genuinely creative, and genuinely exploring an art. I'm an "amateur", and I'm going to share my thoughts in C&C, and there's nothing you can do about it. 

PS, any time you want to learn how to use a computer, let me know.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 27, 2013)

CA_ said:


> You don't see my point? My point is to show the irony in your condescending tone towards two amateurs exchanging ideas, when your work itself is mediocre at best. I'm so tired of "seasoned pros" looking down from their ivory towers at all of us amateurs just because we haven't been shooting since the Reagan administration.
> 
> All people want is friendly helpful advice. And if they want to try something out of the box, by God, let them. It's called finding your own identity. Sure, they're going to mess up here and there, but please, _please_, don't let your own bloated sense of self worth get in the way of someone being genuinely creative, and genuinely exploring an art. I'm an "amateur", and I'm going to share my thoughts in C&C, and there's nothing you can do about it.
> 
> PS, any time you want to learn how to use a computer, let me know.



Sure, give all the bad advice you want to...... and I doubt very much you could teach me anything about computers, networks, routers, switches, servers, or anything else... since that IS what I do professionally now.


----------



## CA_ (Jan 27, 2013)

*edited out of respect for TPF


----------



## terri (Jan 27, 2013)

Good grief...no sooner do I have to put down one quarrel between 2 members that had nothing to do with the OP's thread than I come back and see a new one!  :er:    Seriously, guys... do you not understand the nature of this thread hijacking?   

Take it to PM if you must.   But please take it OUT of this thread!


----------



## joshua_ (Jan 27, 2013)

_jessicalynn_ said:


> View attachment 33652
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hello jessicalynn, 

I'm new to photography, but thought I'd just say that when I first look at your photos I'm immediately drawn to your eyes.  Also, I like how you used your hair in the second photo.  

I would think that anything you could do to continue to highlight your eyes would be great.  Looking at your photos here I would want to try just a slight bit of angle difference between you and the camera.  Your cheek bones and structure around your eyes may really stand out in a good way if you find that angle.  

Keep having fun!


----------



## .SimO. (Jan 28, 2013)

Well this thread definitely created a lot of buzz so in regards to your photos, you have made it a controversial thread with tons of different opinions. Kudos to that for sure.


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 28, 2013)

.SimO. said:
			
		

> Well this thread definitely created a lot of buzz so in regards to your photos, you have made it a controversial thread with tons of different opinions. Kudos to that for sure.



Should I be flattered?


----------



## Designer (Jan 28, 2013)

_jessicalynn_ said:


> .SimO. said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's a compliment.  

Awaiting your next thread.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Jan 28, 2013)

Fun thread.  10/10. Would read again. 





Bacon.


----------



## Rick50 (Jan 28, 2013)

I probably shouldn't comment but I thought of this when I saw this post. I remember watching some video's on YouTube by Peter Hurley from NY 
and he does headshots in landscape with the tops of the heads chopped off. I kind of liked these but like I say I'm not a portrait photographer.

Actor's Headshots Photographer in New York City & Los Angeles | Peter Hurley Photography, Modeling Head Shots (NYC and LA)


----------



## EIngerson (Jan 29, 2013)

_jessicalynn_ said:


> .SimO. said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Actually you should. lol. The photos are great and you're very pretty. I hope my duckface comment wasn't taken as harsh. It's just a personal thing with me. I hope you're not discouraged from posting photos here. I look forward to seeing more of your work.


----------



## .SimO. (Jan 29, 2013)

Yes, that was a positive statement. I think all my threads combined equate to 4 pages... lol


----------



## _jessicalynn_ (Jan 29, 2013)

EIngerson said:
			
		

> Actually you should. lol. The photos are great and you're very pretty. I hope my duckface comment wasn't taken as harsh. It's just a personal thing with me. I hope you're not discouraged from posting photos here. I look forward to seeing more of your work.



Thanks and I'm not easily offended at all! But I have to say, I wasn't making a duck face. That's just my face. But whatever.


----------



## TordFuglstad (Jan 29, 2013)

Now, to bring this thread back to subject..

I think the composition in both photos are not too bad. I do like it when you chop a little bit off the top of the head, like Hurley.
The poses are good, only a little shame you seem a bit stressed out around your mouth when you are such a beautiful model.
Would love to see you completely relaxed. 
I'll not comment on the lack of contrast seen as that is a part of the effect.

All in all, this is not bad at all and just a few minor tweaks and they will be lovely.


----------

