DSLRUsers.com

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 5:42 pm**

Shot for a brochure

*Second image edited to remove "offensive" branding :-)

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 6:06 pm**

I like the first one, excellent!

Was the second one hard to take? :lol:

Tristan

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 6:10 pm**

I like #1 a lot.
The WB appears to be slightly off for me, but I don't mind it so much - in fact it adds something to the image.
I can't describe what I'm seeing, but "Bank Gothic font" comes to mind

It's very stainless steel 1960's clinical asylum like. It feels aged yet modern. I dunno...

#2 - got a laugh

Endless bad puns to be had.

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 6:15 pm**

first one looks great. I can picture it taking pride of place in a brochure already.

the second one - well... i'll not rise to the bait. sell if to pfizer i imagine they have no shortage of $$$.
i do find the pink stethoscope tubing a touch distracting though.

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 6:35 pm**

Yeah - blood pressure monitors sponsored by Pfizer's Vigara :lol:

Had a good laugh when I saw it

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:24 pm**

I'd like to see a bit more PP in the first one; I think it just needs a tad more contrast or something to make it pop a little.

For the second one, shouldn't the arm be outstretched or ar least perpendicular to the body?

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:02 pm**

First one is a great shot, like it a lot.

Alex

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:13 pm**

gstark wrote:
For the second one, shouldn't the arm be outstretched or ar least perpendicular to the body?

The arm position is actually ok. What is out of position is the stethescope. It should be closer towards the inner aspect of the arm (over the brachial artery).

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:00 pm**

Was a Viagra blood-pressure cuff actually designed to fit over an arm? :wink:

I thought it may have been designed for a different part of the anatomy.

Posted: **Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:59 pm**

cricketfan wrote:Was a Viagra blood-pressure cuff actually designed to fit over an arm?

I thought it may have been designed for a different part of the anatomy.

Unless you're hung like an elephant, I'd say it fits the arm better :wink:

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2006 12:49 am**

The second one would be better if you replaced the model with a baby's arm holding an apple.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2006 9:19 am**

First shot is superb
Don't like the second shot for two reasons
1. Is the stethescope positioning accurate?
2. Will you need permission from Pfizer to use an image of their logo on a brochure?
Cheers
Graham

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:18 am**

Number One is a ripper...

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:19 pm**

#1 is a terrific image pharmer the composition and dof is well suited.
cheers
marco

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2006 8:03 pm**

I could play with No.1. Contrast and a little ageing with split toning in either duotone or colour balance in PS. Very strong, this one. I like it.
No. 2 needs a little crop off the left, but is it art!

I hope they went well for the brochure.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2006 8:49 pm**

Colcam wrote:I could play with No.1. Contrast and a little ageing with split toning in either duotone or colour balance in PS. Very strong, this one. I like it.
No. 2 needs a little crop off the left, but is it art!
I hope they went well for the brochure.

Thanks, but disagree on both fronts.

The first image will be colour in the brochure. This is the only style of B&W I like (kind of low key toning) - high contrast or sepia "ageing" don't do it for me at all :-)

The second needs room to breathe on the left, cropping it makes it too narrow and tight for my tastes

Posted: **Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:03 am**

For a brochure, number one is an absolute pearler. Striking as is.

What was the brochure for? If it is aimed at medical staff, the technical inaccuracy of the stethoscope placement may be worth fixing.

DSLRUsers.com

Doctors Rounds

Doctors Rounds