For me this was lost between a candid and a portrait without grabbing me as either. It's a nice pose with good lighting and is well processed. But shot at f16 there's nothing that's out of focus, so my eye is constantly being pulled to that wall of clippings. Pull her away from the wall a bit and open up the aperture. The far away look is nice if I don't think she's staring a the guy in the red shirt. Personally I might have given her a little light from the back-right as well. Nice shot, but nothing that grabbed me, particularly in a free study.
I gave you a "7" cause I like the portrait, the model and the composition. Maybe for someone could be too hot the tonality of incarnate but in this case I find it perfect.
Other expression to obtain a better result
I like the portrait, but I guess I would reiterate what Tate said. The technicals are good. I think you have a very pretty model that is very nicely lit, and it is well exposed and processed. I think a more lively expression and/or a more dynamic pose might have helped.
The image is well done and many voters seemed to find it better than average (mostly 6). As for a portrait, it is sharp and well-lt. I am left wondering what it would look like with more commitment on the emotion (is she sorrowful, happy, pensive, it is hard to tell) - and what it would look like with no teeth showing and a more expressive emotion.
Score-wise I would say it did pretty well for a standard portrait that isn't really telling any sort of story.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
