Comments on: [Photos] Cristina Otero Gets Creative With Her Self Portraits

By: matt taylor

matt taylor — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 15:30:00 +0000

Love the creativity in these.. Isn’t the point that these are pretty great even with “crappy” equiptment.

By: Josh Ott PhotoandDesign

Josh Ott PhotoandDesign — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 16:10:00 +0000

maybe is supposed to almost be a ying and yang type of deal? with the fruit and eyes being life and vitality and the skin representing the more cold harshness of deaths embrace just my take. But i love the look and feel the concept is brilliant and love the makeup and fruit combos very well done. these could make very interesting gallery series prints.

By: JustinGillPhoto

JustinGillPhoto — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:06:00 +0000

The CONCEPT is there, but the execution leaves a little to be desired.

I especially take issue with the shallow DOF, and the skin tones. I thought fruit was supposed to represent life and vitality; why are the skin tones so sickly looking??

By: Glenn Marsh

Glenn Marsh — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:04:00 +0000

Finally, someone who actually sees the humor in this. For the record I never told Casey anything about expressing his opinion.

By: Bogdan radu

Bogdan radu — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 18:53:00 +0000

Hello Glenn, Casey has the right to voice his opinion about your comment referring to Robert”s comment about David’s comment who was referring to Paul’s comment about Cristina” shots.

By: Shannon Wimberly

Shannon Wimberly — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:40:00 +0000

cool….

By: Glenn Marsh

Glenn Marsh — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:59:00 +0000

Casey, you have completely missed my point and the irony of my response and the hypocrisy of Robert telling David what is the appropriate way to address his comments.

By: tim gallo

tim gallo — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:43:00 +0000

at least 3 person mentioned being “technically correct” and they did it by looking at a bad and small resolution jpg :). i am pretty much sure photo`s are not so “crisp” or “bright” cause it`s… for online purposes? :)
it`s just if a photographer has a goal in his work, a vision and knows the camera enough (at least for the pictures shown here) – is there any sense of talking about the picture`s f. correctness. (mmm, i wonder what f. i am talking about).
it`s so much better to talk about her concept, or how it`s not original comparing to what happens in fine art photography world right now, or how this post demonstrates absolute lack of taste :) (sometimes i feel that people know about photography only via internet :), any credit to christie’s and sotheby’s? or paris photo maybe? ^_^ how many amazing self-portrait photographers were shown there that deserves much more attention than the “fruits” above)

By: Casey

Casey — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:43:00 +0000

Hey Glenn, Robert has the right to voice his opinion about David about Paul. If you’re going to take on the role as PC police you might want to lead by example by shutting up. Who are you to tell Robert what to do.

By: Glenn Marsh

Glenn Marsh — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 06:40:00 +0000

Dave also has the right to voice his opinion and when some starts off their comment with “meh” it sure as hell sounds like Paul is poo pooing Christina’s work. I for one could careless if Paul prefers images with a greater DOF or fruit with more vibrancy. If you are going to take on the role as the PC police on this thread you might want to lead by example by shuting up. Who are you to tell David what to do. Have a nice day. Oh, yeah I nearly forgot, I think that the work that Christina did here was very good.