When using a live model instead of a mannequin there are so many issues to consider. Today we will look at side-by-side comparisons of photos from Bruce Metcalf and my own work.
Metcalf had a discussion brewing about this image on his Facebook page. He has graciously allowed me to show the original photo and a modified version for this discussion on ASK Harriete.
Now, pretend that you are a juror and you have 5 to 10 seconds to make a decision to accept or reject. Go with your gut reaction and make an immediate decision.
Here are the photos. Below are the questions:
A second set of photos illustrates a similar issue. This time the model is looking straight at you. Same necklace, different models, different poses.
Which photo do you like best?
Which photo better presents the necklace?
Do you like seeing the model's face or eyes? Or is too much of the model distracting?
Do the model's face and hair add important information about the necklace or are they a distraction?
Do you think the skin color is better in the Metcalf Original Photo or in Version 2?
Are there other questions that you would like to ask?
Please give your comments and opinions.
No answers from ASK Harriete, today. I don't want to bias your opinion. I will aggregate a consensus in the next post. Please leave your opinion in the comments below or on Facebook, or email me directly.
Discussion of the model issues will continue on Thursday when a range of opinions will be expressed.
DISCLAIMER: Obviously, the photographic images illustrating Bruce Metcalf's "Lucia's Poppy Necklace" are not the same size because I cropped a vertical shot, cutting off the model's face right above the lips. The original rectangular image is now a more square format.
I compensated a little by making the Version 2 image a little wider. If I had the original image, I could have played with the proportions a little better, but it does bring up an important point. Square images often appear more pleasing on the Internet whereas just a few years ago, a square image would have been very unusual.
This post was updated on January 27, 2022.