# Female opinion needed. Please Help!



## joshusaf (Sep 22, 2015)

Close Thread thanks for your help.


----------



## Vtec44 (Sep 22, 2015)

This can't be a real thread.


----------



## joshusaf (Sep 22, 2015)

Vtec44 said:


> This can't be a real thread.



Half of photography in magazines is of people, I believe the subject of this thread is a valid one


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 23, 2015)

I don't know if this is for real either... you didn't pay for these, I hope? The only picture that looks even somewhat like a usable portrait type shot is the one in the black T shirt by the white fence, that's not too bad. The rest for the most part look at best like just hanging out with your buddies (and the technical quality is not good). Of course I don't know what goes on on dating sites so what do I know.


----------



## joshusaf (Sep 23, 2015)

vintagesnaps said:


> I don't know if this is for real either... you didn't pay for these, I hope? The only picture that looks even somewhat like a usable portrait type shot is the one in the black T shirt by the white fence, that's not too bad. The rest for the most part look at best like just hanging out with your buddies (and the technical quality is not good). Of course I don't know what goes on on dating sites so what do I know.


i did pay for these.


----------



## JimMcClain (Sep 23, 2015)

You paid too much. Yes, I know you didn't say how much - it was too much anyway.


----------



## joshusaf (Sep 23, 2015)

I appreciate the feedback,  Im sensing the photos are poor quality? I cant tell a good photo froma bad one, that is why I am on this site, I am trying to learn


----------



## Aaaak (Sep 23, 2015)

I think you missed the point of this community, which would evaluate the technical quality of picture itself (composition, light, concept, édition, whatever) but hardly judge just the beauty of the subject (either if you look handsome or ugly). 

Anyway, I've been to dating sites and I think the picture's quality does impact on what people think of you. As they said, these pictures are technically poor, but I'd say the numbers 3, 9, 8 do you better than the others.

Female here. 
Cya

Sent from my C2104 using Tapatalk


----------



## sm4him (Sep 23, 2015)

Another female heard from here, but not one who can help much. I really don't know anything about dating sites--although, I can tell you that if there is really THAT much emphasis on having just the right photo, then I'm glad I'm not on those sites. Funny that people will say looks don't matter, but then can't get past "looks" to even find out who a person really is.

Anyway--IF I had to pick one of these, I'd pick either the one labeled 11, but which is the fifth photo in the thread (which is VERY confusing by the way, having numbers ON the photos that doesn't match the order of the photo in the thread), or the one that is labeled #10. #8 is okayish too, but I like #10 because it looks like you being natural.

The reason people are all over the photos is because they look like snapshots someone would take with a phone, not casual, lifestyle portraits you'd actually pay for. The lighting is very harsh, causing hard shadows on your face, and not putting you in a very flattering light (literally).  The backgrounds are extremely distracting as well--cars, stairs, etc. behind your head.

I would absolutely NOT use the first one posted, or the ones labeled 2 and 3 (which are the 3rd and 4th posted, I think--this is starting to make my head hurt). The first one would say to me that this is a guy who can't even put his phone down long enough to have a picture taken.  The other two say that the photos were so unimportant to you that you didn't even bother to set your drink down.
Get away from the car--girls, for the most part, aren't as interested in your ride as you are.

Redo these. You know what girls want to see in a photo? They want to see YOU. The real you. Not you posing and trying to look like something you're not. A guy is never more attractive to me than when he is confident in himself, he loves life and it shows, and he's engaged in something he loves to do. If you can show one or more of those things, the right girl WILL find you attractive.
Oh, well, also uniforms. I find men in uniforms incredibly attractive and sexy.  So, another alternative would be to go join the military.


----------



## limr (Sep 23, 2015)

sm4him said:


> I would absolutely NOT use the first one posted, or the ones labeled 2 and 3 (which are the 3rd and 4th posted, I think--this is starting to make my head hurt). The first one would say to me that this is a guy who can't even put his phone down long enough to have a picture taken.  The other two say that the photos were so unimportant to you that you didn't even bother to set your drink down.
> Get away from the car--girls, for the most part, aren't as interested in your ride as you are.



Yes to everything Sharon said, but especially this ^^^  I'm a woman who loves cars but still would be put off of someone who was SO into his own car (either as a driving machine or a status symbol...doesn't matter) that he had to pose with it. 

And yes, the one labeled #10 is the only one I would consider if I were you. #9 wasn't too bad but you're too stiff. The others have distracting background or aren't well-lit or don't help you come off very well. #1...just no. I'm sure you're a perfectly lovely person and you seem enthusiastic and genuine, but in that image, you kind of come off as a tool. Sorry. I understand - you're probably uncomfortable in front of the camera, not sure what to do with your face or hands, and think it might be better if you were "caught" in a candid pose or had a prop or something, but you're much better off just looking at the camera and being yourself.


----------



## pjaye (Sep 23, 2015)

3 & 10. This from someone who met her significant other on a dating website. We've been together 2 1/2 years. I spent a lot of time on dating websites. 

The pictures absolutely matter, but not in the way Sharon thinks. I never judged a person based solely on their looks. However, it did play a part. If they were holding alcohol in every picture, I wasn't interested. And lets be honest, looks do matter to a certain extent. You really do need to be somewhat physically attracted to someone. That said, even if I wasn't bowled over by their looks, that didn't preclude me meeting them. 

The other pictures look posed, and forced.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 23, 2015)

#13 because it has most of a nice car in it - the subject ... oh, and someone standing there in front of it.

But I'm not female so take my objectivity with a grain of salt.
and burn the rest, you can include # 13 too.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 23, 2015)

joshusaf said:


> H
> alf of photography in magazines is of people, I believe the subject of this thread is a valid one


People  don't  put their photos in a magazine and ask which one they should use for a dating service


----------



## jcdeboever (Sep 23, 2015)

I'm not a girl but these are much better than your first post. I gather you like your car, nature, and the park. I would say 6 or last pic. You need to number them! I like the park bench side view but at least fill in flash was needed. Actually light was needed in most and that makes a lot of difference. The photographer obviously did not have lighting equipment. Hope you didn't pay much. Start over, I wish I lived close, and I stink at photography but I could get that done. A simple soft box on a flash, better positioning from light, and some laughs is all that's needed. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## Designer (Sep 23, 2015)

joshusaf said:


> I appreciate the feedback,  Im sensing the photos are poor quality? I cant tell a good photo froma bad one, that is why I am on this site, I am trying to learn


I do appreciate your frank admission, and I think you've come to the right place.  It may take some time, but check out some portraiture done by other photographers.  

Learn what makes a good photograph.  A couple of places to start your photographic education:

A Photographer's Guide to Posing Men In Portraits » Expert Photography






After you learn a bit, you can start looking around for a better photographer.  Yes, you will have to pay (again), but think about whether you would like to pay a little and drive an old pickup truck or pay a little more and drive a nice upscale sedan.


----------



## Designer (Sep 23, 2015)

jcdeboever said:


> I would say 6 or last pic. You need to number them!


They are numbered, and the last shot (which is numbered #4) will draw mainly the gold diggers.


----------



## jcdeboever (Sep 23, 2015)

Designer said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > I would say 6 or last pic. You need to number them!
> ...


OK, I see them now on some of them. Numbers should be visible, in order.... You are making this difficult. Phone app is not helping you here either. Gold digger? Wrong attitude dude. You will never know anyway. If your just looking to date, who cares. If your looking for a lifetime, you will find out soon enough. Besides, once your married, half is hers anyway as it should be, if your both committed and in love.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## MarshallG (Sep 23, 2015)

joshusaf said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know if this is for real either... you didn't pay for these, I hope? The only picture that looks even somewhat like a usable portrait type shot is the one in the black T shirt by the white fence, that's not too bad. The rest for the most part look at best like just hanging out with your buddies (and the technical quality is not good). Of course I don't know what goes on on dating sites so what do I know.
> ...


You got ripped off. 
The photographer who shot these doesn't understand anything about lighting. Your face is in shadow in most of these photos. He should have placed you in shade, use a reflector or use a fill flash to even the illumination on your face. These were shot by an amateur -- and a poor one -- who did not use any lighting equipment at all, and who probably doesn't understand lighting, either. 
Not only is the lighting poor, but the photographer didn't pose you well. For starters, your chin doubles in many of the photos -- big turn off. As it turns out, if you pose your subject wrong, she can be the skinniest super model in the world and still have a double chin. I'd use a longer focal length and highlight the lines of your face. 

Think you shouldn't pay this charlatan, and get a photographer who knows what he or she is doing.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 23, 2015)

MarshallG said:


> joshusaf said:
> 
> 
> > vintagesnaps said:
> ...


or like many on dating sites,
take your shirt off,
hold a big fish
and take a selfie

But I prefer the ^^ idea above


----------



## runnah (Sep 23, 2015)

Are you looking for a wife or just a couple of "casual encounters"?


----------



## KmH (Sep 23, 2015)

I agree with MarshallG - the lighting and posing is typical of work produced by a not very well informed nor skilled amateur photographer.
It does not look like the 'photographer' did any post production work to properly finish the photos either.
As always when being a consumer it's "buyer beware" when it comes to buying.

In a lot of the photos you have dark eye sockets, in photography circles sometimes known as 'raccoon eyes'.
Particularly for dating photos, your eyes are the most important feature of your face that need to be photographed properly.


----------



## Vtec44 (Sep 23, 2015)

joshusaf said:


> Vtec44 said:
> 
> 
> > This can't be a real thread.
> ...



I'm curious to know where you got your percentage from.  But hey, since this is a real thread best of luck to you.


----------



## jaomul (Sep 23, 2015)

Have you any friends that have taken photos of you in the last year or two where you are enjoying yourself doing "your" thing.

These photos look a little to posed to give you any personality. Without going to much into technicalities the photographer may likely have done you a dis-service here .


----------



## Derrel (Sep 23, 2015)

Thankfully, he is wearing a shirt in every single one of them.


----------



## jaomul (Sep 23, 2015)




----------



## sm4him (Sep 23, 2015)

symplybarb said:


> 3 & 10. This from someone who met her significant other on a dating website. We've been together 2 1/2 years. I spent a lot of time on dating websites.
> 
> The pictures absolutely matter, but not in the way Sharon thinks. I never judged a person based solely on their looks. However, it did play a part. If they were holding alcohol in every picture, I wasn't interested. And lets be honest, looks do matter to a certain extent. You really do need to be somewhat physically attracted to someone. That said, even if I wasn't bowled over by their looks, that didn't preclude me meeting them.
> 
> The other pictures look posed, and forced.



Good point, barb, and I stand corrected. In fact, I even went on to basically insinuate that the pictures matter, by mentioning what impression I'd get from some of them.
What I guess I was trying to get at was that it sounds like people take these dating site photos more seriously than I'd have thought, in terms of actually HIRING someone to do them. I don't think the "right" photo for a dating site is so much about how professional the photo looks. The OP seems to be really obsessed with getting a photo that, I don't know, makes him look like the next candidate for People magazine's "Hottest Bachelor," and that's not necessary, imo. A "not perfect," simple photo that shows a person really being themselves would draw me in faster than a professionally done, great quality image that looks super posed and like the guy is trying to hard to look "attractive."
Just be yourself. 
Now, if you're interested in dating a skilled photographer--yeah, you probably want a photo that looks like it was taken by someone who knew what they were doing. 

Of course, back to the issue of these being taken by a complete amateur who didn't know what they were doing--a GOOD pro photographer would not only get the lighting right, and eliminate the distracting backgrounds, and that sort of thing--they would also know how to work with you to end up with some candid moments that show YOU being comfortable with who you are.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 23, 2015)

I hadn't realized the numbers were out of order, so I don't know what I looked at or picked last night! The quality is bad, they look like cell phone pictures done hanging out with your friends.

Go look up portrait photographers or studios in your area, ones that are established and have been in business for some time. (Stay away from the 'people with cameras' who apparently promote themselves all over craigslist and facebook). Look at the websites to see the quality of their photos, see if they offer casual or lifestyle (and look at other photos they do, seniors etc. to get an idea of their style and quality of their work). It is possible for someone to come up with enough pictures for a website to look like they're better than they are as a photographer, so take your time to check them out.

I think there's so much crap out there that people don't see good quality photos enough - if you look at 'good' that might help get your eyes used to seeing good quality. Try looking up wedding and portrait photographers and notice the color, brightness, sharpness, how the background looks, etc.

There are usually good pro photographers who will do outdoor shoots if that's what you'd like. Often they may allow for a change of clothes too; would you ever have a need for a professional portrait? I'm just thinking you could maybe get your money's worth getting a few professional or business portraits as well as casual portraits done in one session. I hope you can get some better pictures done that show the real you and your personality.


----------



## markreck (Sep 23, 2015)

I'd go with 12. Speaks to the tree hugger community. Plus the exposure looks right. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pjaye (Sep 23, 2015)

sm4him said:


> Good point, barb, and I stand corrected. In fact, I even went on to basically insinuate that the pictures matter, by mentioning what impression I'd get from some of them.
> What I guess I was trying to get at was that it sounds like people take these dating site photos more seriously than I'd have thought, in terms of actually HIRING someone to do them. I don't think the "right" photo for a dating site is so much about how professional the photo looks. The OP seems to be really obsessed with getting a photo that, I don't know, makes him look like the next candidate for People magazine's "Hottest Bachelor," and that's not necessary, imo. A "not perfect," simple photo that shows a person really being themselves would draw me in faster than a professionally done, great quality image that looks super posed and like the guy is trying to hard to look "attractive."
> Just be yourself.
> Now, if you're interested in dating a skilled photographer--yeah, you probably want a photo that looks like it was taken by someone who knew what they were doing.
> ...



For the record, I never paid to have someone take my picture for a dating website, but if I did, and they turned out like these...well, I'd be asking for my money back. And absolutely +1000 to the "just be yourself". It's incredible how many "posed" shots there were. Of course, I ended up with the guy who set his camera on a timer and took a picture of himself doing wood working. It was totally his arms that caught my attention. I totally agree that "professional" photo's aren't the right ones for a dating website. It's really hard to get a feel for someone in a posed, awkward shot.


----------



## rexbobcat (Sep 23, 2015)

It's not a real dating website photo unless it's 5 years old and .3 megapixels.


----------



## MarshallG (Sep 23, 2015)

People pay for professional haircuts, so  nothing wrong with paying for professional photos. 

Of course you don't want it to look like a typical corporate or HS yearbook photo, but if you hire a good pro, he or she should be able to create a casual photo that still puts your best foot forward.


----------



## joshusaf (Sep 24, 2015)

thanks for all your feedback and information, this ws very informative for me


----------



## Bebulamar (Sep 25, 2015)

joshusaf said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know if this is for real either... you didn't pay for these, I hope? The only picture that looks even somewhat like a usable portrait type shot is the one in the black T shirt by the white fence, that's not too bad. The rest for the most part look at best like just hanging out with your buddies (and the technical quality is not good). Of course I don't know what goes on on dating sites so what do I know.
> ...



And I thought those are selfphies.


----------

