|
|
Mohamed Banna
{K:34237} 9/3/2005
|
nice shot
congratulations for the BOD
|
|
|
|
|
Davy Jourget
{K:64} 4/28/2005
|
Nice photographie.
But trêve de balliverne, it seems to me tu la connais cette young woman ? Am I okay ?
See you soon on the moon, baby.
Ze belu of ze new generation of the death which kills.
|
|
|
|
Marcio Janousek
{K:32538} 7/20/2004
|
Your series is amazing.
________________________________________________+7
|
|
|
|
Shaun Rullens
{K:2732} 7/15/2004
|
lovely shot. I like it.
Keep up the good work!
Shawn
|
|
|
|
Mary Vareli
{K:15826} 7/9/2004
|
amazing portfolio, you are a visual surrealist, very talented, there is something cinematic about your images
great work, I like this one also!
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Leporati
{K:894} 7/3/2004
|
very strong picture. It tells so much about Sophie and her life, about that day in that place.
I love this photo !
cheers
lepo
|
|
|
|
|
m.c. lopez
{K:14766} 6/20/2004
|
Pas mal ! Je ne suis pas de ceux qui pratiquent le portrait académique, je ne le pratique même très très peu, alors inutile de dire que j'aime le portrait en situation, comme ici !
La rue nous appartient, le métro aussi (même si ça devient dur dur à Paname !)
|
|
|
|
|
michelle k.
{K:16270} 6/20/2004
|
beautiful. wonderful composition.
|
|
|
|
Matej Maceas
{K:24381} 6/19/2004
|
...ing.
|
|
|
|
|
Matej Maceas
{K:24381} 6/19/2004
|
Interesting discussion. I can see both your points. The colours outside are indeed reminiscent of crossprocessing, but my own first reaction was similar to David's - overexposure. Even if it was intentional, it steers the photo away from a portrait. The reason is that all that brightness pulls the eye outside of the metro, and thus the left side becomes the main subject area. The role of the portraitee is then much less dominant, like she just happened to be in the picture without being of primary interest. So as a regular portrait, it doesn't work; as an 'Unusual Vision' portrait, it's interest.
|
|
|
|
|
Sébastien Pepinster
{K:424} 6/17/2004
|
Precisely! ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
David McClenaghan
{K:9481} 6/17/2004
|
I wasnt really suggesting a beautiful blue sky.
Just a bit more detail to stop the eye from being drawn away from the subject.
And it doesnt remind me of cross processing at all, just overexposure!
Hope these comments are what you were asking for ;)
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
Sébastien Pepinster
{K:424} 6/17/2004
|
Yes but I'm not sure at all I'd have been satified by this kind of result, with a "beautiful" blue sky... For me it would have been too "flat". Here, the left side seems to be obtained by crossed development and thats why I like it...
Thanks for your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
David McClenaghan
{K:9481} 6/17/2004
|
Sometimes its easier too expose for the brightest area and then bring up the darker area using photoshop.
Its amazing how much detail can be brought out of the shadows, whereas once youve lost your highlights there pretty well gone forever.
|
|
|
|
|
Sébastien Pepinster
{K:424} 6/17/2004
|
Couldn't do but burn the background as there was a HUGE difference of light intensity between inside and outside the metro...
Thanks for your comment, I was about to think that my whole work had to be put in the trashcan...
|
|
|
|
|
David McClenaghan
{K:9481} 6/17/2004
|
Well I like it.
Great expression on the womans face.
Only downside is the burnt out background.
It tends to take your eye away.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
Sébastien Pepinster
{K:424} 6/17/2004
|
I really don't understand why I don't get any comment over my pictures...
Is it so bad?
In the time it remains on the first page of the critique, my pics are viewed in average 10 times and almost never commented. Some other pictures, in the same time are viewed 100 times and commented 10 times.
What's the matter with my photographs???
|
|
0 
