Wetlook World ForumCurrent time: Tue 14/05/24 03:22:04 GMT |
Message # 81429.8 Subject: MUCH more important than Fstop! Date: Sun 24/05/20 16:57:44 GMT Name: Amf |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
|
I'm glad to see this thread, because it is frustrating to purchase photo sets when the quality is inconsistent. Bad focus, underexposure, or the maddening trend of putting the model right in front of the sun or bright light (so she is completely in the shadows) have all made me regret spending money on producers' sets.
However, what matters MUCH more than technical quality is simply how well the pictures show off a model's beauty and joy. Many producers (and Wetlooker is really the worst by far) include every single photo that was taken during a shoot, whether the model looks bored, baleful, confused, or awkward, or if she has her hand in front of her face, or her eyes closed, or a weird look on her face. Can you imagine what a professional model would think of someone sharing those kind of bad shots with the world? For god's sake, have some standards! Let the outtakes be outtakes! A real peeve of mine is seeing photos of an attractive girl in wet clothes who just looks like she is bored and waiting for the shoot to be over!
Another peeve (due to the same lack of quality control, especially from Wetlooker, the factory production line of wetlook) is endless repetition of images. A girl jumps in a pool and makes a splash, and we see SIX pictures in a row of the splash she made (but not any of her, since she is underwater and completely out of view). Or the camera operator aims down at the model's feet and takes--not one!--but SIX identical pictures in a row of the wet shoes. I'm not complaining about wet shoes either--the same is true for every camera angle. Six identical pictures of her wet ass, six identical pictures of her wet hair, six identical pictures of her smiling at the camera until her smiles cracks and fades away. Or worse, and even more common (and not limited to just Wetlooker, but almost every producer): a girl jumps in the pool and then we get 20 pictures of just her head above the water, and finally, when she climbs out--the glory moment!--we get only one or two pictures of her actually showing off her beautiful body in wet clothes.
Besides the irritation of having to waste storage space and download time with all these identical and/or bad pictures, there is the more serious issue: they kill the enjoyment of even looking at these photosets. One photo of a girl looking like she is hating her life and feeling stupid in soaking wet clothes will undermine all the photos of her actually looking like she is happy and enjoying it. Lately, I have been going through all my Wetlooker photo sets and keeping only the good ones. Usually what that means is that I delete about 80 percent of the shots in each set.
You can brag about how ever set contains over 200 photos! But when most of those are throwaways, what's the point? PLEASE exercise some quality control!!!
|
In reply to Message (81429) producers pictures!
By Anonymous - Fri 22/05/20 17:05:41 GMT Producers photo review.
Please keep in mind that I don't want to disencourage any producer, I only investigated briefly the pictures and made a list with some experiences.
Eurowam 1200x1600 72 dpi
Overal lightning ok, sharp, correcty white balance, focus is ok, also uses low f-stop from time to time to emphases the subject, correctly edited pictures. Only some higher resultion can be appriciated.
Wetlooker 1950x1303 72 dpi
Lighted by harsh flash, whitebalance differs from picture to picture (clothes can change color before being wet). I doubt if there is any editing here. some rubish pictures with closed eyes and incorrect focus are also in the list. Less could be more ...
Erik 1202x1800 240 dpi
Pictures are sharp and correctly focused, shots portrait most of time. Also uses a save F-stop to control sharpness. Whitebalance is ok in the whole set. the dpi allows you to enlarge the pictures
waminstyle 1373x2064 96 dpi
Sometimes I am confused about the focus point, some harsh shadows. Lightning could be better. Whitebalance is correct. very uncommon resolution though
Wamderland 2700x1800 72dpi
These are snapshots. There is actually no real style to comment here. I don't think that the foto's are edited in some way. Mostly distubed by the unbalanced horizon.
wetfoto 3240x2160 300 dpi
Light is sometimes bit overdone with loose of some detail, whitebalance is correct and pictures are in focus. Highest pictures quality of all.
|
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs:
(you can change amount)
|
[ This page took 0.027 seconds to generate ]