| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/13/2009 08:54:33 AM · #1 |
Not fair! Just yesterday I did a shoot with this woman:
She was the most glamorous woman I have ever shot, she owns at least 500 pairs of designer shoes, handbags, jewellery, dresses from all over the world in 3 huge walk in wardrobes, and is obsessed with Audrey Hepburn - she was glamour personified - and TODAY the challenge is announced?
I'm just going to have to cry :-(
|
|
|
|
05/13/2009 09:15:40 AM · #2 |
| Dont even mention it. That is all I have been doing the last couple of weeks. I do have a model I have to shoot this weekend. So let's see how that works. |
|
|
|
05/13/2009 11:07:39 AM · #3 |
hmmm...why is she flipping you off though??
j/k..... |
|
|
|
05/13/2009 08:34:25 PM · #4 |
| Pity fotoman forever ain´t around, I bet he would have loved this challenge :) |
|
|
|
05/13/2009 09:56:44 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Not fair! Just yesterday I did a shoot with this woman:
She was the most glamorous woman I have ever shot, she owns at least 500 pairs of designer shoes, handbags, jewellery, dresses from all over the world in 3 huge walk in wardrobes, and is obsessed with Audrey Hepburn - she was glamour personified - and TODAY the challenge is announced?
I'm just going to have to cry :-( |
Uhhhmmm, that is not at all how I perceive Glamour photography, maybe you ought to google "glamour photography" or look at this link...
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamour_photography |
|
|
|
05/13/2009 10:07:22 PM · #6 |
I would love to see something like the 1940's high drama light and shadow play of Hollywood's glamor era.
  |
|
|
|
05/13/2009 10:14:55 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
I would love to see something like the 1940's high drama light and shadow play of Hollywood's glamor era.
|
I second that! |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 01:06:28 AM · #8 |
| Just for clarification..will child images DNMC in this contest? |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 01:29:31 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by bnilesh:
Just for clarification..will child images DNMC in this contest? |
With the majority of voters, I would have thought, yes. |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 02:03:16 AM · #10 |
| Ah this looks interesting! I might go and dust off my camera and enter this challenge :) |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 02:31:15 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Ah this looks interesting! I might go and dust off my camera and enter this challenge :) |
Glad I'm going in the grunge !! looks like all the big guns will be in the glamour |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 04:31:07 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by LalliSig:
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Not fair! Just yesterday I did a shoot with this woman:
She was the most glamorous woman I have ever shot, she owns at least 500 pairs of designer shoes, handbags, jewellery, dresses from all over the world in 3 huge walk in wardrobes, and is obsessed with Audrey Hepburn - she was glamour personified - and TODAY the challenge is announced?
I'm just going to have to cry :-( |
Uhhhmmm, that is not at all how I perceive Glamour photography, maybe you ought to google "glamour photography" or look at this link...
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamour_photography |
Glamour Photography and Glamour are absolutely not the same thing! This is not a glamour photography challenge but a challenge with a focus on Glamour.
definition...
#1 eemingly mysterious and elusive fascination or allure; bewitching charm
#2 elegance, luxury, high fashion, etc. or their aura around a person, situation, etc.
I think the example above is certainly glamourous as are the 40's Hollywood glamour girls. I for one certainly hope we don't end up with page after page of 'galmour photography' by its strictest defintion and people take a wider view. |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 07:28:11 AM · #13 |
| I think this is a challenge to find the prettiest models despite the definition of glamor. Just my opinion. I fit more into the grunge challenge anyway. Good luck to everyone. |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 07:57:10 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by rrdjserv:
I think this is a challenge to find the prettiest models despite the definition of glamor. Just my opinion. I fit more into the grunge challenge anyway. Good luck to everyone. |
I'm expecting the Glamor challenge entries to be mostly Not Safe For Work. Grunge is more interesting to me, so that's where I'll be. Best pf ;icl tp everupme! |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 08:10:01 AM · #15 |
Here's one I did last year.
eta: this woman looked nothing like this! LOL!
Message edited by author 2009-05-14 08:11:01. |
|
|
|
05/14/2009 09:05:52 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by LalliSig:
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Not fair! Just yesterday I did a shoot with this woman:
She was the most glamorous woman I have ever shot, she owns at least 500 pairs of designer shoes, handbags, jewellery, dresses from all over the world in 3 huge walk in wardrobes, and is obsessed with Audrey Hepburn - she was glamour personified - and TODAY the challenge is announced?
I'm just going to have to cry :-( |
Uhhhmmm, that is not at all how I perceive Glamour photography, maybe you ought to google "glamour photography" or look at this link...
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamour_photography |
I hope your version of this challenge doesn't reflect too many others opinions, otherwise I fear its not worth even entering. Culturally we are all different as its a world stage here, but its important for people to understand the huge difference between glamour photography and simply 'glamour', as TallPaul explained. I disagree that children cannot be entered - a child dressed in her mummy's high heels, dress and jewellery can look just as glamorous as anyone, its just there would be a sense of humour injected into the shot. And a high fashion gay guy can also be glamorous, as can a string of pearls, a high heel, or a single glove. We don't even need a person as the subject to be glamorous. But if you want erotic shots, make an eroticism challenge. Or call it a 'glamour photography' challenge. But lets not all get our knickers in a knot over the results when we end up with 50% nudes and 50% high fashion statements, and bad scores all round.
Perhaps grunge is looking a safer bet..... lol
|
|
|
|
05/14/2009 09:22:25 AM · #17 |
Bummer. It never occurred to me until reading the above that "Glamour" could refer to those rather tacky (in my opinion) gauzy photos ironically referred to as "glamour photography." Ick.
Merriam-Webster definition of glam·our
|
|
|
|
05/14/2009 09:27:20 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Originally posted by LalliSig:
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Not fair! Just yesterday I did a shoot with this woman:
She was the most glamorous woman I have ever shot, she owns at least 500 pairs of designer shoes, handbags, jewellery, dresses from all over the world in 3 huge walk in wardrobes, and is obsessed with Audrey Hepburn - she was glamour personified - and TODAY the challenge is announced?
I'm just going to have to cry :-( |
Uhhhmmm, that is not at all how I perceive Glamour photography, maybe you ought to google "glamour photography" or look at this link...
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamour_photography |
I hope your version of this challenge doesn't reflect too many others opinions, otherwise I fear its not worth even entering. Culturally we are all different as its a world stage here, but its important for people to understand the huge difference between glamour photography and simply 'glamour', as TallPaul explained. I disagree that children cannot be entered - a child dressed in her mummy's high heels, dress and jewellery can look just as glamorous as anyone, its just there would be a sense of humour injected into the shot. And a high fashion gay guy can also be glamorous, as can a string of pearls, a high heel, or a single glove. We don't even need a person as the subject to be glamorous. But if you want erotic shots, make an eroticism challenge. Or call it a 'glamour photography' challenge. But lets not all get our knickers in a knot over the results when we end up with 50% nudes and 50% high fashion statements, and bad scores all round.
Perhaps grunge is looking a safer bet..... lol |
Not sure why Gay had to be thrown in. A male whether straight or gay can be glamour.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2009 06:23:51 PM · #19 |
| My apologies to any straight men who like to be glamorous, I was just thinking of the wonderful gay friends I have that get dressed up very glamorously. My ex used to like to be glamorous too, I had momentarily forgotten. We used to have arguments about who would get to wear the most glamorous clothes on stage, lol. |
|
|
|
05/17/2009 07:23:00 PM · #20 |
My model bailed on me today last minute. Literally 1 hour before the shoot. MUA, assistant, and person who owns the house all were set to go! NO F^%$^ing model. I spent all morning packing and collecting all items for the shoot and her mommy calls to tell me that she was sick all night!
OOooH I was mad!Still am!
Maybe no entry from me.
Was so looking forward to this one.
Message edited by author 2009-05-17 19:23:31. |
|
|
|
05/18/2009 04:24:24 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by LalliSig:
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Not fair! Just yesterday I did a shoot with this woman:
She was the most glamorous woman I have ever shot, she owns at least 500 pairs of designer shoes, handbags, jewellery, dresses from all over the world in 3 huge walk in wardrobes, and is obsessed with Audrey Hepburn - she was glamour personified - and TODAY the challenge is announced?
I'm just going to have to cry :-( |
Uhhhmmm, that is not at all how I perceive Glamour photography, maybe you ought to google "glamour photography" or look at this link...
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamour_photography |
Maybe your concept of glamour is more erotic than reality.:-) each to thier own.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2009 05:22:03 PM · #22 |
Anyone not planning on voting willing to take a look at my 'propsed entry'? I'm having some hard time editing and learning Elements, not looking for straight up help...just some direction to learn a bit more really.
|
|
|
|
05/19/2009 11:01:26 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by BrianR:
Originally posted by LalliSig:
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Not fair! Just yesterday I did a shoot with this woman:
She was the most glamorous woman I have ever shot, she owns at least 500 pairs of designer shoes, handbags, jewellery, dresses from all over the world in 3 huge walk in wardrobes, and is obsessed with Audrey Hepburn - she was glamour personified - and TODAY the challenge is announced?
I'm just going to have to cry :-( |
Uhhhmmm, that is not at all how I perceive Glamour photography, maybe you ought to google "glamour photography" or look at this link...
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamour_photography |
Maybe your concept of glamour is more erotic than reality.:-) each to thier own. |
I am flattered you think I invented the concept of Glamour Photography, but alas, someone else beat me to it :) |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 12:28:09 PM · #24 |
Interesting reading this post.
Here in the UK Glamour, where images are concerned, is generally boardering on soft porn.
However I think we all know that this is not what is expected here and with that in mind I am in with a tasteful image
that in my opinion says Glamour.
Best of luck to everyone... |
|
|
|
05/19/2009 12:38:40 PM · #25 |
Maybe some people are just stuck in the 80's fashion disaster. Glamour these days(and from the beginning of photography) does involve certain element of sex, whether it be showing of skin, the theme and feel of the picture or just the expression on the model's face. Get over it prudes!
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/13/2025 02:21:39 PM EDT.
