File :-(, x, )
Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
Hey /p/. Do you like the color or the sepia type better- or does the photo just plain suck? Thanks.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:05:20 20:00:12Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1200Image Height790
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>185968
lol at anon calling her fat, she's in good shape.
sounds like a ronery guy with high standards from looking at too much photoshopped porn

anyway, liska.. got more from the same shoot?
>> Anonymous
>>185976

no one called her fat, you fucking retard

i'll take this one any day over that crackwhore chink
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>185975

I guess my biggest confusion is that she's no where NEAR bbw, so i must have photographed her wrong if she comes off like that. Also-SHE isn't using it as an excuse. *I* asked you if that's what may have possibly caused it. She is thankfully not a stick, or a runway model- or even tall enough to fall into that category. And as i said anyway, she's retiring, so i guess she can do as she pleases :)

>>185976
Not yet, i have about 3 shoots i have to finish editing before I can finish Victoria's. I can post some of the other girls' shoots up, but that's pretty much it.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>185975
she looks fine to me...I wasn't aware women were SUPPOSED to look a certain way. I mean, seriously guys, it's her fucking WAIST. One, the dress and position emphasize it, and two...it's average waist size at the largest. If you interacted with real women more often you might know that.
>> Anonymous
>>185983women were SUPPOSED to look a certain way

women, no

models, yes
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OM NOMONONOMONOMONOM

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:05:21 00:41:44Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width615Image Height611
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
I second the color version. Go with that.
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
     File :-(, x)
>>186024

i just don't want the thread deleted due to trolls or anything :)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.9Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern750Focal Length (35mm Equiv)36 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:05:18 21:34:00Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating250Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias-2.3 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, Auto, Return DetectedFocal Length24.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1000Image Height669RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
>>186032
awkward expression here. she looks quite...surprised.
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>186035

the whole photo itself sucks, I just needed something to post, an i'm not about to post a hi res one :)
>> Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM
>>185937
This is clearly the better of the two, imo. The tone of her clothing with the light coming through it is marvelous, and sets up the scene along the lines of the rule of 3rds, I think.

The reason her waist looks larger: She is ever so slightly slouched, and isn't tensing/posing with effort. Immeh.

>>186032
Interesting pose. Particularly her legs/feet. This photo feels like it belongs in my "artish" folder, so there it goes. It also feels like it should be greyscale, as it is. I can't really justify this, except to say that most of the images that end up in my "artish" folder are greyscale.
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>186069

if you'd prefer, i actually have one where her dress is in focus :)
>> Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM
>>186079
Which dress?
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>186080

the flower one that she's wearing.
>> Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM
>>186083
Ah, so the one from the greyscale (gray?) image.

Well, I'm certainly not adverse to additional images of yours. How could I be?
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
     File :-(, x)
If you're going to save a pic it may as well be a decent one :)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern750Focal Length (35mm Equiv)33 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:05:20 23:20:13Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/3.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating250Lens Aperturef/3.8Exposure Bias-2.3 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length22.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1100Image Height736RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
>>186058
hah, that's awesome.
>> Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM
>>186096
Indeed. It may as well :)

Thanks.
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>186239

My pleasure. Looks better than the other one at least ;)

Now i'm debating over whether I like
>>185937

or

>>185947

better. Opinions?
>> Depressed Cheesecake !wFh1Fw9wBU
Great pictures.
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
>>186245
They're just two very different shots. 47 is better as a regular portrait, 37 is better for the context and scene. Overall I prefer 37, the context makes it more interesting to me, but that's just a preference of style.
>> Anonymous
>>185955
Hum, honestly both gals don't look the same. I'm not calling you a liar, just saying that in the pics you posted, the two subjects don't seem to share any physical characteristics. 'Cept for the small breasts maybe.

The faces, for example, are totally different. Notice the chins. Do you have any more pics of the shoot?
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>186253

that's because they are both different girls, just the same location :) The girl in the flower dress is actually a clothes designer, and I agreed to take some shots for her ;) While I was taking pictures of>>186096, i decided that I wanted to take Valerie to the same location, just in different sections of the hotel.
>> Anonymous
>>186269
I was talking about your OP's pic and the NWS pic.
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>186271

OH. Same girl, she was using a wig in the NSFW.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>186273
Rather than the hair I was talking 'bout the face shape, in yours it seems more... bulky. But upon close inspection I realised lips are almost exactly the same.

She looks quite different in both pics.

First one is way better than the sepia one, btw.
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>186285

Oh yeah, it was definately an initial surprise when I first saw her, but then again with some photographers & photoshop, the girl ends up looking completely different anyhow. That photo's about 6 years old. Also: angles are fun. I have a shot loaded onto lightroom at home where she's doing a similar pose, and the shape of the face is the same. I'll try to post it later if you're curious.