Please accept my apologies.

I thought it was completely edited, because (to me) it looks completely edited.

If you're happy with it, then brilliant.

To me it looks like the photos I used to take when I was a kid, when I'd always manage to get my finger or thumb in front of the lens when I was taking a picture.

And having looked at Guy Aroch's site as you suggested, I'm still totally bemused with this style of photography.
Don't get me wrong, there are some really nice photographs in his portfolio, but there's also a lot of not so nice photographs in there too. Photographs that look like really bad point & shoot snaps, with a single flash and bad shadows, that most people would have ditched because they hadn't turned out properly.
The ones of Hayden Christiansen and Elijah Wood, and the girl in the pool...I had hundreds of bad photos like that when I was just getting into photography, using my old film point & shoot camera, only they didn't have famous people in them, and they didn't have a following either...because I binned them!

Suddenly it's cool to have bad photos.

But d'ya know what? It's cool. It would be hell of a boring if we were all the same, wouldn't it?

Anyhoo...
I still personally think your images would have been far better off without the effect. I think they're strong enough to stand on their own, and in my last post, although I said I didn't like the effect, I was actually still praising the images you took.

Again...just my opinion, and if you achieved the look and feel you were after, then I dof my cap to you.

Your edit is a big improvement.
I'm still finding that whole road scene a distraction.
especially the white lorry. I would be tempted to darken it a little so that it didn't stand out so much.


I've just looked too and I totally agree - its a strange collection of stunning photographs mixed with really amaturish looking ones. Very odd.

I really don't like the one with the cars in the background I'm afraid - but overall I like the set - but agree that the effect does nothing for me. It has a vintage look - in a sort of 'damaged' photo way... which to my way of thinking isn't so good.

xx

I did anticipate to get mixed reviews on the outcome of such an process and that's fine, everyone is welcome to their own thoughts. What I like about his work is the fact he defies the general stereotype of high fashion photography and yet still works within the set sub genre.

As for the roadside shot, thats fair enough. I understand what you're all saying, Its not the greatest and I admit that.

on a slightly different note here are a few without the 'horrible' vignette effect:

I like the second of those three - I'm not sure about the distracting blurred lines in front of the models on the first and third though - they do look a bit like something unexpected got in the way!

xx

2nd shot for me is excellent Dan.

I love the overall tone to it. And you're direction of the models is spot on.

I think this shows that you are a strong photographer, and I personally don't think you need those other gimmicks to sell your shots.

Thank you very much everyone, I aired on the side of caution posting these as they're are in fact for a university project to which I had submit. I mention caution as to receiving criticism and then doubting my own work.

This is a common flaw in all creatives as you will always fine flaws in your work that you want to change.

I can totally understand everyone's thoughts on the vignette idea, maybe it was a good idea, maybe bad. At the end of the day, it was something I tried and liked but understand it may not always be well received.

It will be interesting to get tutor feedback on this. On a side note, there is a total genre of photography devoted to poor quality imaging which is the novelty I'm sure you're all aware of lomography.

Cheers again guys.

From Smashing Magazine:

“Lomography” is a term quite unknown to most of us, but many practice it. The name was inspired and derived from the Russian “LOMO” cameras. Lomography not only refers to photographs taken with the LOMO camera, but can also apply to casual photography taken with any ordinary camera.
The characteristics of Lomo photographs are oversaturated colors, extreme optical distortions, rainbow-colored subjects, off-kilter exposure, blurring and alternative film processing, all things usually considered bad in photography. In short, Lomography is the act of taking photographs without thinking, and ignoring the established rules of “good” photography

Like I said earlier, I binned hundreds of these bad photographs when I was a younger....and now they're retro cool?

Don't get me wrong, some of them are strangely beautiful, and I do find myself drawn to some of them...I think it's a nostalgic longing for my youth or some sh*t like that.

Like the latest shots too Dan - esp 1 and 2, and like how that girl looks 'miserably-cool'