File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Isn't she just lovely~

-Zepherillas
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution100 dpiVertical Resolution100 dpiImage Created2007:05:14 11:12:16Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/20.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/20.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length200.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width624Image Height936RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
http://zepherillas2.deviantart.com/
>> Anonymous
um....
there's something wrong with her face.... isn't there.
>> Anonymous
Where?
>> Anonymous
fails at use of bandaid tool
>> Anonymous
You would rather see bags under her eyes and such?
>> elf_man
I'd rather see models that look human. We're so used to all the editing they use for magazines, most of us can't even tell what "human" in a model shot is anymore, we accept it as natural, and that's just bad.
>> Anonymous
>>47893
Firstly, there's different levels of editing - Eg, Fashoin magazines such as Vogue use HEAVY editing because it's supposed to be perfectly aesthetic and focussed on the clothes standing out. whereas, a normal woman's mag such as Cosmo would only use heavy editing for the covers and select pages, you might notice that some are less 'perfect' than others.
I'm not excusing the use, but i do this for a living and it's not all 'just to make them look perfect', there's some good reasons for most of it. Sex sells, and everyone needs to make a living.
>> elf_man
>>47943
Yeah, that's true.
>> Anonymous
She looks fake, if that is what you're trying to achieve. The eyelashes, hair, and lips especially look a little too doll-like.
>> Anonymous
Ah, fuck you people. I like the shot and editing which have been done to it. My only complain is that maybe /p/hotographer should have brought something else in the scene not just her face, what I mean is - more detail. But as I already said I like the shot.
>> elf_man
I never actually commented on the shot; it is pretty good.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Lips were never edited BTW

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution100 dpiVertical Resolution100 dpiImage Created2007:05:15 23:27:14Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/22.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/22.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length130.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width554Image Height832RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>48093
want!
>> Anonymous
Both painfully boring pictures. Not to mention the fact that hse's ugly, which doesn't help this picture's case at all.

Overall, fail.
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>48162
keep that nonsense confined to your lesbian wiccan seance circles or whatever the hell it is that bitter ugly girls are doing these days to forget that no one took them to prom. i'm sure it involves candles.

anyway, these are well composed shots and all and the chick is hot, but i gotta agree that all the postediting or makeup or whatever happened to make her look unrealistically plastic makes the shots look cheap and phony. I know you gotta do what you gotta do for industry standard aesthetics and all but at some point i feel like it's just not art anymore. like, what's the point of photography if you're not capturing The Truth?
>> Choamsky
>>48162

I agree. In not somany words. I wouldn't say she's ugly, but we're supposed to say this is a good photo because it's of a moderately attractive woman. Well, it doesn't work.

There really is nothing stellar about these shots. The second one makes her look deformed. It's obviously airbrushed, and the composition is just bizarre.
>> ac
>>48166
All art has to exactly mirror reality? So, what, Dali's not an artist?

All photography is at least one level of abstraction removed from "Reality". Most are several steps away.
>> derail get des
>>48166
>>The Truth
When has art EVER been about truth?
For that matter, who's truth?
>>48177
Dali was a cocksmoke but at least it /seems/ that he saw that art, just like everything else, was bullshit and did it up for the lulz.
He let people throw cats and water at him ALL DAY.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:05:15 23:16:22Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width852Image Height589
>> ac
>>48197
Dammit. I thought it was gonna be 3D.
>> Anonymous
>>48200
i have never really seen these things in the first place, though nice photo and fuck /p/ elitists
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
excuse me i meant to clarify that photography is a capturing of something real rather than a creation of something fantasy. sticking to the truth is important in this medium. obviously not all art has to fit this standard.
>> Anonymous
>>48197

i actually prefer the one on the left. the variation in her skin makes it more interesting imo
>> ac
>>48289
Again, not necessarily. There's a lot of staged photographs out there. The worldview you're espousing pretty much rules out anything other than documentary photography and landscapes.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelPictureGearCamera SoftwarePictureGear Version 4.1Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2002:08:05 10:46:20Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width640Image Height480