14th December 2004, 05:54 PM
sigh u just dont get it..........
Originally Posted by blurblock
14th December 2004, 05:58 PM
14th December 2004, 05:59 PM
i think your shots are good........tastefull.....
i like what u've been doing..........i was just a little taken aback by some comments that i saw in the shoots....abt guys just asking abt the girls....first comment was how beautiful the girl was.
.....and i always thought its the person behind the camera is whats supposed to take all the glory!
14th December 2004, 06:00 PM
hmmm how abt child photography.. think its really challenging... also cannnot have too many phtographers otherwise will only have shots of them crying.... (unless the child is the not scared kind)
14th December 2004, 06:04 PM
Really .... I don't
Originally Posted by pollock
14th December 2004, 06:07 PM
Ewww... I won't wanna imagine what your drift is...hhahaha...
Originally Posted by pollock
Anyway, some of the folks here are just having fun lar... even the ones who comment on beautiful women. Some are really photographers playing around. Or course, you are right that there are some who are voyeuristic and I have seen such post too.
Anyway, if you wanna upz the standard, the best way yet is to start posting. Naturally, that will be followed by others. If not, just enjoy the company here of all the various types of photogs.... amateurs, pros and others...
14th December 2004, 06:08 PM
14th December 2004, 06:30 PM
14th December 2004, 06:48 PM
nevertheless, i think all of us are guilty of, from time to time, pressing Cntrl+Alt+0 and Spacebar+Left-click, and oogling
ok, just thought of a good idea. instead of paying for a 'model', why don't we shoot one another? 1) save money 2) put ourselves in the model's shoes for once 3) since all are 'photographers', able to instantly review and critique the pix 4) very low chance of being leeched on sites like sggirls
Last edited by Stereobox; 14th December 2004 at 07:02 PM.
14th December 2004, 07:31 PM
Hi riva, to me photography comprises of 2 components - beauty and meaning.
If both or either is in abundance or in harmonious proportions, people record them with their cameras.
I used to do some model shoots like those offered in CS.
In my humble opinion, i felt that each girl exudes beauty and grace in different ways, whether in their pose, gaze or features. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder and thus each has his right to do the type of photography he enjoys.
But i have come to realise that we have to ask ourselves what we love in each picture we see, and the uniqueness of each picture and its signifcance and importance to us. This is the philosophy of our pursue in photography.
Hence i think it is cruel of you to put down the photographers doing models shoots since your philosophy is different from theirs and make such a sweeping statements that the photographers participate only to capture pretty girls.
On the other hand i have stopped going to all these CS organised model shoots because i realised that all i have been taking are pretty faces, and in that i do not see meaning. To me, composition in its most harmonious forms,
innocent laughter or simple gestures of love or perhaps even hate(why cant we capture awful incidents? the world is full of them, so dont drown yourselves in fantasy) would make a fabulous picture, and it is one that would make my heart melt.
I am not discounting landscape pictures. I love them. But again, i try to leverage on the lanscape condition to bring out the mood.
Just my 2cts worth.
Last edited by porshee; 14th December 2004 at 07:37 PM.
14th December 2004, 07:33 PM
That's an interesting idea...
Originally Posted by Stereobox
i neva thought it could prevent 4)
14th December 2004, 08:07 PM
Horizon is tilted. A big no no for landscapes. Just my 2 cents, no offence hor.
14th December 2004, 08:48 PM
Originally Posted by 2100
14th December 2004, 08:54 PM
14th December 2004, 08:58 PM
14th December 2004, 09:07 PM
Are you serious???
Originally Posted by user111
14th December 2004, 09:30 PM
This topic is quite interesting.
Has or does anyone watch ANTM? There are lots of things to be learnt for photographers - most of all, a pretty face does not make a good model! A model has to know how to 'work-it', look alive, energetic, have presence for the camera. A model is more than someone who can flash a pretty smile, she has to be 'edgy' as well.
So far the non-pro girls mostly smile for the photographer - not much variety in terms of poses and look. But hey guess what? It is a start for photographers who wants to polish up their techniques in terms of composition, lighting skills etc.
As for motorshows, as a friend of mine puts it... FREE models! Maybe you'' pay just the entrance fee - otherwise, you'll have lots of chances to polish up skills. At the same time, it is also a chance to network. If you happen to take a nice picture of one of those girls, she might recommend you for a big job further down the road?
As far as galleries goes, I never put up portraits of family members online. The Internet can be a dangerous place.
14th December 2004, 09:39 PM
having ran through the threads and its postings, i am wondering why are some parties asking to see 'some skills' of the thread starter, besides having perused her photo equipment? where is/are the connections? is having certain equipment a pre-qualification for one to make known one's observations? or possessing 'some skills' is also a pre-qualification? i am puzzled.
14th December 2004, 09:50 PM
Oh. People like Sweet Young & Cute Things lor
and they always prefer "Oyster" to Banana!!!
14th December 2004, 10:01 PM
I feel that these are quite extreme, presumptuous, sweeping statements to make, especially the one about men who cannot afford Internet connection but want to surf porn. Internet connection and pirated VCDs are so cheap nowadays that almost anyone who wants to can afford to have access to them. There is nothing wrong with a pretty girl willing to pose for a fee for photographers wanting to improve their skills. Willing buyer and willing seller. And nothing looks better on a well-composed photo if it has something pleasing to the eye as a subject. I personally like to take pictures of young children (see my avatar on the left)... but does that make me a paedophile? Come on, let's not question the motive of the photographers. Bad hats are everywhere. This is a forum about photography, not morals. So let's get on with it people.
Originally Posted by pollock