HOME | DD

cweeks avatar

cweeks — Ah ... Mischa...


Ah ... Mischa...
Published: 2004-04-21 19:08:24 +0000 UTC; Views: 16391; Favourites: 210; Downloads: 2486
Redirect to original
Description I remember this girl when she was 15. Still very hot. But ... damn has she blown-the-f-up.

I remember her publicist trying to tell me how big she'd be. I hear that a lot.

But ... he was right.

This was a b/w convert from a Canon 1D file. i know it was f2.8, 800 iso ... probably 200/250th of a second.
Related content
Comments: 95

freecityrhymesfreecityrhymes [2004-04-25 22:03:23 +0000 UTC]

great picture! an awesome capture of her expresion, i like the shallow depth of field and the way the lights in the background turned out. a nice overall feeling to the picture which i can't describe with my vocabulary

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

jarkjark [2004-04-24 00:21:51 +0000 UTC]

beautiful photo!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to jark [2004-04-24 03:04:31 +0000 UTC]

thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

monachettimonachetti [2004-04-23 09:13:42 +0000 UTC]

Ah... the REAL reason people watch the O.C. right there. :) (Smile) It's a lovely photo... I'm making it a favourite just because I love her ha ha.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to monachetti [2004-04-24 03:06:23 +0000 UTC]

she's the reason i'd watch the oc ... if i had time to watch t.v.

not only is she hot but she's really nice and unassuming.

cheers,
chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

misteriddlesmisteriddles [2004-04-23 08:42:06 +0000 UTC]

That's a whatsit lens makes that effect, isn't it?

Anyhow, I love the effect .. and the model's expression is so warm and friendly.
simple, but +fav

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to misteriddles [2004-04-23 19:12:05 +0000 UTC]

it's the 70-200 2.8L lens. has an amazing ability to whack backgrounds!

thanks!

chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

scoota269scoota269 [2004-04-22 11:03:07 +0000 UTC]

im loving this photo. the focus is awesome, the b&w adds to the effect. the lighting and focus on her face is perfect. +fav

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

thirdhandsaucerthirdhandsaucer [2004-04-22 03:51:10 +0000 UTC]

I am caught and emmensely caught in a trance by the lights in this photo.

Not exactly sure what it is about the lights, they glow as a normal light would, maybe the composition, her face, on one side, the bulb lights on the other. the blending of the lights is a wonderful effect, it makes everything seem so far away. A wonderful choice in focus, I think. The lights almost look like small vector images put into a photograph, and they are, for some reason, very attractive, and grab my attention.

Great use of flow through the picture as well. It is beautiful the way you've positioned this piece, the main subject on one side, so the viewer doesn't exactly know what you're aiming for. Which I find a very appealing effect. Your model is indeed very pretty, and chose a very friendly smirk of a pose.

Your background seems to be overlayed by the model, I really enjoy this, because it seems as though two images were merged together. I'm very pleased at your decision to take this in black and white, as I'm not sure any colors would have worked as superbly as this has.

thank you for sharing this piece, I really enjoyed it.

take care,

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to thirdhandsaucer [2004-04-22 04:18:52 +0000 UTC]

thank you so much!

i always hesitate before i post an "entertainment person" ...

cheers for the comments,
chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

justthornejustthorne [2004-04-22 00:30:12 +0000 UTC]

I'm debating the choice of focus, here's why. It's that any image has a "story" to it of left to right, origin to destination, narrative to punchline - it's a subconscious interp that overlays any composition (regardless of where the viewer's eye is first drawn). So, in this case, the clarity is the origin, and the less-clear is the destination, and I'm not sure this is as effective as it would be if we arrived at her clear eye. It doesn't ruin the shot or anything - I just share the thinking with you in case it might be useful.

Overall, I'm thrilled to see this. I've been smitten with Mischa for years, and in recent months have investigated a lot of her publicity photography, much of which has disappointed me. (It's made me think that I could do better, which suggests grievous disapointment, haha.) It's seemed to me that much of the modern photography has neglected her most charming assets, her cheeks and her twinkle. (Even "tight" smiles would lift those cheeks back out.) It's seemed to me like a lot of photographers have been trying to portray her into a mold, rather than leverage her own most beautiful visual aspects.

So I'm delighted to see this shot, which not only leverages her best visual strengths, but so much captures an evident personality. This is a shot she should be proud of, and so should you.

Thumbs Up

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

cweekscweeks In reply to justthorne [2004-04-22 04:20:37 +0000 UTC]

i'll tell her publicist that you think the photos he's probably approved suck!

seriously ... i'm going to tell him because he thinks that everything he selects is the best.

in deference to him ... he called today to say he liked Mischa's take from last night.

thank you so much for the comments!

chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

justthornejustthorne In reply to cweeks [2004-04-22 05:08:52 +0000 UTC]

If you have such an exchange, I'd be fascinated to hear back about it.

Though! to the publicists' possible favor, the "original/exclusive" photography featured on the website isn't as bad - some of it's pretty nice - but rather it's a huge percentage of her magazine fashion shoots that seem to be completely "missing the point" about what makes her special and beautiful.

Anyway, I won't belabor it. But I'd love to see more of yours. You seem to "get it."

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

justthornejustthorne In reply to justthorne [2004-04-22 00:31:47 +0000 UTC]

ps - the shapes of light in the background are a perfect understated compositional touch. Very nice, totally positive.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

spoco2spoco2 [2004-04-21 23:55:39 +0000 UTC]

Beautiful photo, really fantastic look she's giving there, and I LOVE the lights behind her.... by blown up, I assume you mean fame wise, not size wise?? :P (Lick)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to spoco2 [2004-04-22 04:21:08 +0000 UTC]

she ain't fat!

;) (Wink)

chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

jfujitajfujita In reply to ??? [2004-04-21 23:55:37 +0000 UTC]

Motherfuckingawesome. 70-200 f/2.8

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to jfujita [2004-04-22 04:23:02 +0000 UTC]

seriously ... the L glass just flat-out rocks...

but ... my ambient body ... my 70-200 ... that's my go-to lens.

LOVE IT!

The Image Stabilizer is WITHOUT MATCH!

Cheers,
Chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

G-LandG-Land [2004-04-21 23:27:05 +0000 UTC]

Beautifull.
Very well done. i love it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

craniaccraniac [2004-04-21 22:39:11 +0000 UTC]

Lovely portrait. I have absolutely no idea who this young lady is, although judging by other comments, she is well known.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

richardspencerichardspence [2004-04-21 22:13:40 +0000 UTC]

great portrait as usual! love the background blurred lights and the sideways glance of the model

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ZlattyZlatty [2004-04-21 22:11:35 +0000 UTC]

wow ... thats a pretty awesome portrait

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

terpsichoreanterpsichorean In reply to ??? [2004-04-21 21:24:01 +0000 UTC]

i like the lighting in the background -- not sure if thats a spotlight or what. i sort of wish there was a bit more focus on her face, and perhaps that strange shadow of her hair wasn't there, but other than that its a solid portrait.

she's definitely gorgeous... pretty eyes. nice shot.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

urban-khaosurban-khaos [2004-04-21 21:21:39 +0000 UTC]

when i saw the thumbnail i just knew it was a weeks, how you doing man, apart from taking photos of extraordinarly beautiful girls

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

kristoffkristoff [2004-04-21 21:08:36 +0000 UTC]

Damn, I like the bokeh...what is that...70-200 F2.8L ?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to kristoff [2004-04-21 21:20:01 +0000 UTC]

yep. amazing lens. the only other lens in the short telephoto that comes close is the 85/1.4.

chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

kristoffkristoff In reply to cweeks [2004-04-22 02:15:54 +0000 UTC]

Cool, all the L series lenses are amazing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

kedralynnkedralynn [2004-04-21 20:20:44 +0000 UTC]

It's different kind of picture of her than most of what you see in the magazines and stuff. They're making her look so sexy now. I remember her from Disney's Ring of Endless Light or something and thinking she was cute... I don't remember where I was going with this.

I really love the lights behind her. It adds to the picture without taking away from her. Great lighting too. Interesting focus. At first I didn't think I liked it, but after staring at it for a while, I think I do.

Nice capture altogether.

You've been on my watch for a while and I'm sorry that I don't comment much. I've been trying to catch up on my devwatch for a month now and I'm still way behind...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to kedralynn [2004-04-21 21:06:54 +0000 UTC]

i have to take the "normal" photos that you see in magazines as well. otherwise my desk will complain. but ... i prefer the horizontal headshot. to me it's way better to look at and ... when they do use it ... it has to be a "double truck" or two-page spread and it generates more income.

glad you ended up liking it.

no worries about not commenting. just looking is cool too!

cheers,
chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

shockffshockff [2004-04-21 20:15:34 +0000 UTC]

I like the focusing on the right eye like you said... it seems to fit this close up type portrait... also, I like how because of the shallow depth it only catches some of the hair up top in focus... nice job..again.. ;) (Wink)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Virtu-ImageryVirtu-Imagery [2004-04-21 19:36:36 +0000 UTC]

ExquisiteNod

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MikkelTMikkelT [2004-04-21 19:12:27 +0000 UTC]

Really nice shot, I like her smile a lot, in fact very much... Not much to say about that :D (Big Grin)

And hey! That's no Leica :) (Smile)

Good job ;) (Wink)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to MikkelT [2004-04-21 19:28:49 +0000 UTC]

you're right ... it's no leica!

but ... the film from the leica last night hasn't even made it's way to the lab yet!

cheers,
chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MikkelTMikkelT In reply to cweeks [2004-04-21 19:37:21 +0000 UTC]

Fair enough ;) (Wink)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

empathymagempathymag [2004-04-21 19:11:45 +0000 UTC]

a very nice photo...

r.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

dconstruckdconstruck In reply to ??? [2004-04-21 19:10:16 +0000 UTC]

good pose and lighting and all... however, it looks to me like your depth of field is a little too shallow... cause the entire face isn't in focus. perhaps less zoom, and a closer shot? pretty girl though!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to dconstruck [2004-04-21 19:28:11 +0000 UTC]

was focusing on her right eye.

i love shallow depth! it rocks.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

dconstruckdconstruck In reply to cweeks [2004-04-21 21:17:05 +0000 UTC]

oh ok! well nm then...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

el-billoel-billo [2004-04-21 19:09:53 +0000 UTC]

very nice capture, i love the lights in the background very unsharp! Clap keep it up! ;) (Wink)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to el-billo [2004-04-21 19:31:24 +0000 UTC]

the lights are what hooked me. the canon 70-200 2.8 does a great job of whacking out the background!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

A-Zim11A-Zim11 [2004-04-21 19:09:50 +0000 UTC]

u know mischa?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cweekscweeks In reply to A-Zim11 [2004-04-21 19:30:08 +0000 UTC]

know her? i wouldn't say that in the context of which you're asking. but ... she knows who i am and her publicist knows who i am.

in hollywood ... that's good enough.

chris

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

A-Zim11A-Zim11 In reply to cweeks [2004-04-21 19:39:21 +0000 UTC]

oh i dont understand one bit.... but oh well that sounds awsome :) (Smile)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

A-Zim11A-Zim11 In reply to A-Zim11 [2004-04-21 19:40:22 +0000 UTC]

also how u take the pcture if u dont know her?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0


<= Prev | 1 2