Heather Grace

Actually I kind of like it. Reminds me of Weston just playing around. Jiggler could you be so kind as to point us to some of your photos.

Oh, no - not the old "you cannot criticize unless you post your own photos" argument! I do not have a scanner so not photo posts from me. Regardless, any disagreement with my assessments above? If so, tell me why this photo is not any of: out of focus, vignetting, distracting setting, poor composition, poor subject matter, bad lighting.

first of I do not mind criticism that is why the photo is here .
But I do not have a scanner is BS and like a holes will all have got one so like you posted WTF and FO

I quite like this shot.
Placing the female nude figure on a counter top together with other goods has a strong social message. It is not a case of it is not "good" because it is 'out of focus (is it?), vignetting, distracting setting, poor composition, poor subject matter, bad lighting' but that there is something to be "read" from it.
Thanks for posting,
Regards,
John.

Art creates discussion , the shot did that !
For what it's worth from my point of view I don't mind the vignetting (was it deliberate ?) but I would have preferred the shot to be straight on without the distractions of the supports below the 'shelf' and less clutter perhaps. If you're trying to suggest the model's for sale then I think greater focus on the eyes and a head on shot would have worked better but that's one individual's take. Is the photographer pleased with the shot ? What would you have done differently ?
Hope that's constructive enough as for Jiggler's comments - I draw your attention to another post of theirs
"What is it with all of the transvestite prostitute photos on this forum?!!! How about some naked chics" - someone seems to be in wind up mode !

Jigglers comments are valid from his narrow point of view. I have no problem with what he says as it's totally based on his opinion. IMO however the way he says it leaves a bit to be desired, but hey that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.

Anyone can get a scanner for $50 these days so cough up and lets enjoy your work as well Jiggler. So far you haven't given us anything either in writing or by way of images that gives you any credibility beyond just having a belly button opinion.

Look, if you do not have any standards for what makes good versus bad photography, then I can just take a shot of my hairy ass, process it at a one hour place, post it here and call it art. Would that make it good photography? By the "art is in the eye of the beholder" view point, there is nothing at all to distinguish between good and bad, art and shit, etc. This photo would stand equal beside Bill Schwab's photos posted here then as an example. I dare anyone to declare this photo to be as good or equal to one of Mr. Schwab's photos. In fact, there are and must be metrics by which photography and other arts are judged. This photo outright sucks by any standard, unless your standard is crappy photos. Must we be so polite as to not point to shit when we see it.

Like I said I do not have a problem with CREATIVE Criticism,what I can stomach is people hiding their name or work and jet posting comments like WTF and other immature comments I make the images that move me not the ones that you may like ! given that some members are such acute invecils that hide under the cluck of privacy rather then expose their work is more of chicken s... I am sure that the medium will advance to great lengths if we all use jigglers high standrds

Jiggler I guess it's a matter of decorum. Your preferred communication style does not fit with the general discourse and standards of respect generally followed on this forum. I am sure there are forums that both embrace your personal flourishes and profound critiques. I encourage you to find them and partcipate there.

Wow, what a read! Interesting.

First of all, Gustavo, I feel no need for the portion of the frame beneath the tabletop. That we can see straight away that she's on a table really opens the door to some of the criticisms [coarsely] expressed here... she simply comes across as one object between other objects. On a mantle.

I am also getting a feeling that some perspective correction is needed; she seems bottom heavy in this, probably because this is a rather wide lens and your proximity and perspective. To me the result of all this is a distorted look. this may be exacerbated by her centered position.

My suggestion is to [greatly] simplify the composition, distill it to the elements of her form and, and then add objects if (if and only if) they support the feeling that she brings into the frame. Which reminds me, she's clearly looking out of the frame in a sort of artificially wistful way that doesn't befit the composition. I think it might help if she were looking toward 4 o'clock or so. That might fix the perspective vibe I am getting too.

Of course, any day now, I will put all these suggestions into action and start shooting nudes (in other words, take my comments with a grain of salt)