Page 1 of 1

A Russian Beauty!

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:00 pm
by Cre8tivepixels
Thanks for checking these out.......

Image

Image

Image

Image

Dan

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:26 pm
by chrisk
love #3
not sure if i like the lighting in 2&4.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:56 pm
by casnell
Just love #4, great expression !

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:57 pm
by wendellt
exposure is all good on these well done

but i like the 2nd one it has a more mysterious mood to it

and the movement is really cool cool too

what do you think about the distortion when using the 17-55 wide?

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:03 pm
by SteveB
Number 3 for me, good hair action, good expression and I like the positioning of the model and the lighting. Well done.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:11 pm
by Bindii
Have you photoshopped her legs in the second one... cause they like kinda wierd and not at all real...

I do like the last two though... great poses and much more natural...:)

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:12 pm
by Cre8tivepixels
Bindii wrote:Have you photoshopped her legs in the second one... cause they like kinda wierd and not at all real...

I do like the last two though... great poses and much more natural...:)


Can i ask , why would i photoshop her legs? It was shot with a 17-35mm lens tilted down away from her face, so i guess its just distortion..... :)

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:14 pm
by Cre8tivepixels
wendellt wrote:exposure is all good on these well done

but i like the 2nd one it has a more mysterious mood to it

and the movement is really cool cool too

what do you think about the distortion when using the 17-55 wide?


hey mate, i got rid of the 17-55 (too soft) and now have the 17-35....its awesome although see above post, there can be distortion.....lol

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:51 pm
by Bindii
Cre8tivepixels wrote:
Can i ask , why would i photoshop her legs? It was shot with a 17-35mm lens tilted down away from her face, so i guess its just distortion..... :)


Nope... cause that was my next question if you had of said yes... ;)

And yeah it must have been distortion...

either that or she is barbie... *grins*

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:31 pm
by seeto.centric
Dan, i think Bindii might be referring to the slightly odd colour tones on her legs.
could this have been due to the colour tweaks you did?
or just my screen.. again lol
nice shots as usual :)

-j

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 12:13 pm
by jdear
nah bindii was referring to how impossibly thin her legs look!

haut work as usual crea8

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:34 pm
by Oz_Beachside
very nice dan. much better than my first try with my new 17-35, all of mine just added 10kg... :oops:

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:05 pm
by marcotrov
Great images Dan, once again. Exposure terrific. #3 is my pick in this set. I agree Dan long live the 17-35. I love it too :wink:
cheers
marco

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:55 pm
by Raskill
Nice shots once again Dan, she sure is a beauty! 3 & 4 are my choices.

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 1:02 am
by Stolky
Yeah, ditto all positive comments (I like 3 the best...)

This Russian was a "Home-girl" type model shown on "Ralph TV" last Thurs (10:30pm - ch. 9 - fun boy-stuff just like mag...) last Thurs. Great sort. Face reminds me of my first girlfriend.