<< Previous Next >>

Gaya XXV RP (Unretouched)


Gaya XXV RP (Unretouched)
Photo Information
Copyright: Rew Shearer (rewshearer) Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 4954 W: 345 N: 3620] (20919)
Genre: People
Medium: Color
Date Taken: 2009-04-18
Categories: Nature, Artwork, Friends/Family, Experimental, Portrait
Camera: Canon EOS 400D/Rebel XTi, Canon 50mm f/1.8 II, @ ISO 100
Exposure: f/8, 1/160 seconds
Details: (Fill) Flash: Yes
More Photo Info: [view]
Photo Version: Final Version, Original Version, Workshop
Theme(s): Gaya [view contributor(s)]
Date Submitted: 2009-06-10 23:18
Viewed: 784
Points: 31
[Note Guidelines] Photographer's Note
Ok, I couldn’t stand it.

I had to repost this shot with the original unretouched Gaya.

My intention had been to demonstrate a post-processing workflow, and there were plenty of positive comments, but lots of smilies don’t make a good photo in my opinion and I didn’t feel comfortable with such an over-processed over-sanitised image in my gallery.

I realise most people don’t agree. Most people like retouching. Commercial photographers are expected to do it and it’s generally what makes money.

My style is honesty – and I’m glad to say that Gaya shares my view and is happy for her portraits to be faithful and true-to-life. Beauty is not “perfect” and nor should it be: that just creates unrealistic expectations. Besides, when people meet Gaya in real life they never say “oh, you need to be more perfect.” Usually the opposite.

I don’t expect as much good feedback on this, but at least I’m being true to myself … and anyone who prefers the retouched version can still find it here.

--

Reading through all of the comments it becomes clear that it is such a personal thing.

Some people would only settle for "absolute" raw - no makeup, no studio lights, one set of abitrary rules drawn up as they see them.

Some people think if you go 'some of the way' with lighting and makeup, then you have to go the rest of the way and cover up every so-called 'flaw' - although how much covering up, again, seems to be entirely arbitrary and subject to personal taste!

I just like my photograph to represent what I saw in front of me, beauty and flaws together.

Is that everyone's preference? Of course not. :)
manujmehta, mesquens1, jean11-3, dareco, ErikSven, c_rapp, chrisJ has marked this note useful
Only registered TrekLens members may rate photo notes.
Add Critique [Critiquing Guidelines] 
Only registered TrekLens members may write critiques.
Discussions
ThreadThread Starter Messages Updated
To Lightforms: Agreed!rewshearer 1 10-19 12:45
To thy: Gaya ...rewshearer 1 07-31 23:41
To Mitch: Thank you ...rewshearer 1 07-15 17:16
To chrisJ: WS ...rewshearer 1 06-28 13:03
To Gaya: Thank you ...rewshearer 2 06-28 04:23
To c_rapp: The babble ...rewshearer 1 06-25 17:51
To Leica: Personal tasterewshearer 11 06-24 14:54
To WhiteKnight: honestyKilted-Arab 3 06-13 12:56
To ErikSven: Mapplethorpe!rewshearer 5 06-12 23:39
To Kilted-Arab: Honesty ...rewshearer 4 06-12 18:51
To ErikSven: Middle ground?atomas59 1 06-12 14:32
To atomas59: Naturel ...rewshearer 7 06-12 14:18
To pozaru: Cheers ...rewshearer 1 06-12 03:17
To werdir: Glamour vs rawrewshearer 1 06-11 18:39
To teamill: Yay ...rewshearer 1 06-11 18:18
To Sharpshooter: Image conscious world ...rewshearer 1 06-11 02:54
Hi Rewatomas59 2 06-11 00:36
You must be logged in to start a discussion.

Critiques [Translate]

Rew,

Well, it is almost difficult too decide what is more valuable.
I must say I like this version very much, simply because of the beauty of the model, and the honest way you did her right as photographer. realistic and true.

The retouched version is more or less the 'Hollywood' Gaya, perfect in many ways, a dream. But we all know it can't be true.
Still, a perfect piece of work. People do go to cinemas to watch dreams come true. It works the same with photos my friend :)

Great work......both !

Jan

Hi Rew,
I much prefer this untouched version, glad you re-posted it. In comparison to your last photo, I particularly like the non-reflective surface of her skin. Doesn't seem 'plastic-like' anymore. We live in such an image conscious world, so your untouched posts are like a breath of fresh air. Well done and thank you.

TFS,
Scott.

Rew i have seen this shot earlier too and quite liked it then also.
As you have yourself said Rew " Commercial photographers are expected to do it and it’s generally what makes money". so thats the reason behind every make up and glossy things. now if you talk about one's self satisfaction then again your other version come out "lots of smilies don’t make a good photo in my opinion and I didn’t feel comfortable with such an over-processed over-sanitised image in my gallery."

So this is you and you have to maintain balance between both the things and you are doing it perfectly.

PS- i have just read in one of your reply that you are watching 20-20. we here too are enjoying this very much. yesterday only India has one against Ireland.

thanks for sharing this untouched shot.

YAY!!!
I think that's all I have to say right?
Trudy

  •      
  • pozaru Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 3563 W: 737 N: 2401] (19058)
  • [2009-06-11 5:10]
  • [+]

Hi Rew !

I will tell you my sincere thoughts.
I preffer the more natural portraits everytime and I think that I've told you before.
In those natural portraits I don't care about any kind of "imperfections", but this is not that kind of portrait.
This is much more "glamour", in my oppinion, and therefore I preffer the retouched version

sincerely yours,
v

Bom dia Rew,
I agree, Gaya not needs retouchs!
But my point of view is that a picture is not only reality.
But, Gaya not needs retouchs!!!
:o)
Best wishes,
Raimundo

Hi Rew,

All of the technical aspects of this shot are excellent, so I guess you want us to address the issue of the natural look vs. the glamour shot. The problem I see with this photo in that respect is that Gaya is wearing a lot of makeup, which lends itself more to glamour photography. If you and she prefer the raw, natural look, then she should use as little makeup as possible. Her outfit should also reflect this, but the one she’s wearing here isn’t that bad either.

So, since she’s wearing a lot of makeup in this shot, I would say the retouched photo is more true to that style of photography. IMHO.

The smiley is because she’s cute ;)

Regards,
Werner

Hello Rew,I do prefer this version of Gaya's portrait.She is beautiful and imo does not need the post processing.
She becomes unreal somehow with any imperfections [not that I think that she has any!] ironed out.
The lighting is spot-on.
I like the way that she is looking straight at you.
Tfs, regards Jean.

  • Great 
  • papera Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor [C: 109 W: 21 N: 794] (3246)
  • [2009-06-11 13:24]

hi rew,
I am glad you're posting this image and re-opening the discussion on this topic...
two days ago I was commenting a portrait on TE which some members had reviewed negatively due to some skin imperfections and sun glare that the author had not removed. the girl had otherwise an almost flawless skin, but being an outdoor portrait and on a sunny day, the harsh light was kind if unflattering.
I was asking myself what is it with people and the fact that they don't like to see real skin anymore? how is it possible that the natural look of who we are is no longer good for a photo?
this obsession with perfection is indeed worrying - and incredibly stupid in its uselessness.
usually retouching images serves a specific purpose: selling a product or creating an illusion (about the subject, about the ability of the photographer, etc.).
so Gaya has shaved her armpits and her skin has stretchmarks - big deal. I dare say that 90% of women are in the same situation. so why should I let myself be distracted by these traits when there is so much more in this photo and in Gaya that deserves attention? it would be like looking at a great painting and saying "oh, what's that scratch on the frame?"
c.

Hi Rew...beautiful shot...wonderful tones and light..nice work.

Roger

I share Pozaru opinion. Naturel is naturel.
Naturel to me is without make up to start with, no arrange studio lights, specially multiple lights. To a certain extend, there is nothing "naturel" about this particular shot!

Sorry Rew, gotta agree with a couple of the other comments here - "my style is honesty".

Oh yeah? What about the make up? The studio lighting? You're making up your own rules about what constitutes honesty. It's ok to use make-up to hide perceived flaws but not pp work? Same end result, my friend.

Sorry, you're one of the best photographers on this site without a doubt, but trying to claim some sort of moral high ground on this issue just doesn't wash with me.

  • Great 
  • dareco Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 1717 W: 16 N: 840] (15143)
  • [2009-06-11 18:26]

I can appreciate where you're coming from. Realistic and beautiful!! TFS

Quite a lot of debate here, Rew...
First of all, I think it was a good idea to repost this photo. It corresponds to what TrekLens is all about: learning and confronting (or should I say "comparing") visions on photography.
Secondly, I have to say that I prefer this version to the original one, without really considering this an "inspiring" photo. The different parameters are well managed, but I miss some "soul" here. Said this, I feel more "soul" than in the original version, that does not really present flaws in my opinion, but that looks too glossy, too photoshopped to "move" me.
Here, we find back a more natural look, but like Vlad (pozaru), I have the impression that this kind of photo ("glamour" pose) somehow requires a "softer", a more "polished" approach. I am aware, though, that I used the verb "require". Could it be we have become so used to heavily photoshopped glamour photos that we do not accept their "untouched" versions anymore?
Food for thought...
TFS & kind regards,
Erik

What a wonderful can of worms opened up here.. All it goes to show is that some people like make-up, no make-up, natural light, artificial light, no light!, arms at sides, arms over head, retouch in pp, no retouch in pp.. Hey guys and girls - we all have our own styles of photography - the point I think is that unlike many here on Tl you have at least listened to the critiques/comments made about the original post of Gaya.. Many here just ignore good critiques and so on which misses the point of 'learning'.

I like this shot!! Just my tuppence worth....

Excellent close-up and portrait,
good colors and presentation ,
very sharp and clear,

regards,
yogesh

With out reading the comments I'm trying to understand the predominant arm pits and in all honesty, I don't get it. The chains are messy and perhaps 3 are too much.

Is your home painted and decorated? Do you wax your car after washing it? Is your yard landscaped? Do you shave and cut your hair? Do you ware clothes that suits well you or just anything cheep? Why not retouching your photos?

Lovely model. See WS.

Gosh, so much debate about retouching! I find it interesting reading through everyone's comments and seeing how everyone notices my 'imperfections' more than I do, the armpit stuble and even the residue of deodorant that's on my armpits! It's quite hard being critqued and having my stretch marks being commented on. Im not a model, Im just an everyday woman that lets her friend take photos of her. I sometimes wear make up and sometimes I dont. I like wearing 3 chains, and Ill wear 1 or 10 if I want to. Rew doesn't ask me to come dressed in any particular way, I come dressed as I please because its my preference. Just as it is my preference to not have my photos retouched. The last thing I want is for people to see me in real life and to think "you look better in photos than you do in real life" - thats just the way I am. If I had a daugher, and I took a photo of her and photoshoped out a prominent birthmark - what is that saying to her? That im enhancing her beauty? How can that be enhancing her beauty when thats what she looks like? I am a person, not a car or a house, I have feelings, morals and ethics. Everyone has their own opinion on things there are plenty of people out there who love their photos being retouched and thats fine too! I think what everyone has to remember too is the context of the model and the photo? Is this picture of Elle Macpherson in Vogue? or if it just a photo of a woman that went round to visit her friend for dinner?

Yeah!!! I am happy you chose to post this version as well. Beautiful natural. Who said 'flaws' cant be beautiful, who is to say what a flaw is beauty is in the eye of the beholder a 'one size' fits all world would not be so fun kinda really boring.
TFS and sorry about the babble
Christan

Hi Rew

Impeccable sharpness & dof around the face, & the framing with the arms is nice, but the shaved armpits, & tight cleavage, make this shot look a little contrived. The black dress is also bleeding into the black bg. I may try a ws.

Rew (Et al)

What can i say?
Undoubtedly everyone has their own preference in what they see, how they view it, and how it's perceived.

In a nut shell, the technique used to gain the image you got, I personally think, is flawless.
To match that, the model you used is perfect.

I think a lot of people have jumped on the band wagon here and actually missed the point of the site.
I'd say 90% of the reviews of this particular shot are comments and not critiques.
My idea of a critique is advising on how it could have been done differently, made better etc.

To be honest Rew, I have absolutely no studio / model experience or working with individuals as a "Subject", so how could i begin to critique your work?

All I see here technically, Rew is an excellent photograph, with an absolutely beautiful model.
Light, tone, colours, pose are perfect.
My opinion, not critique.

Good luck Rew,
be strong!

Martin

  • Great 
  • thy Silver Star Critiquer [C: 15 W: 4 N: 1] (178)
  • [2009-07-31 9:25]
  • [+]

Admire you have so many good models in your album.
To take a close up of a girl is to let what we could see pretty is pretty not cover up by costumes.

Thank you.

pin sharp portrait Rew. I understand your point about your write-up, but in the end of the day, what matters are the choices of your clients and the images you wanted to include in your Portfolio. Our Portfolio is like our "resume".

Calibration Check
















0123456789ABCDEF