HOME | DD
michmonster — girl with chest tattoo
Published: 2006-11-21 20:45:08 +0000 UTC; Views: 91357; Favourites: 181; Downloads: 104993
Redirect to original
Description
girl with chest tattoo at london tattoo convention (and great boobs too!)Related content
Comments: 30
anna chwalebna here... haha.... i like her too
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i love it and the chick is hot ..is she single .....
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
<3 love the tat. u shud wear more covering clothes tho o-o...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
how bad did getting the tattoo on your chest hurt?
i plan on getting one there.
my back was painful, i cant imagine something being tattooed so close to a sensitive bone ..sternum O.o
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Without all of the nonsense about the quality of the photograph, or type of lighting... and all of the other bullsh*t (get the f*ck off of your high horses)
The tattoo is actually quite good! No, this isn't a piece done in 'highlite bright' colors... These are deep rich hues that really look nice, even within the current photo.
Jeez! You other folks really rubbed me wrong with all of your unrelated, analytical, bull...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Very unattractive photo. The light and angle make the model look very unappealing, and the tattoo is unattractive and dull.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
no offence meant all here... but she looks kind of like a manican lol can anyone else see it?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I KNOW THIS GIRL she was on a cover from a magazine called "tattoo collection"
shes so pretty
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
[link]
obviously not my photography but its the same girl!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This girl is actually on the front cover of Skin Deep tattoo magazine this month!!!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
i love the hair colo, i love the makeup, wow the colors.. everything.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Well, no arguing with your observations, but technically this picture is pretty boring.
I think it's a shame that you didn't postprocess it and that you didn't consider the background. The yellow square "in her" head is disturbing. You should have movede her somewhere with a more neutral background.
I read that these are some of your first shots, so I'll give a few pointers, which you can ignore if you think I'm an arrogant ape. Which I'm not trying to be, so forgive me if you feel that way:
Background: One tends to forget it because your focused on the subject, but it really matters in the picture as a whole.
Flash: If you don't have a stong lightsource in the background (i.e sky, the sun, bright lights), the built in flash is rubbish. The built in flash should be used as a fill light, when you want to be able to see background as well as subject, but the light is
more intense in the background than on the subject. You can buy a used flash from the 70/80es if you don't want to spend money on a new speedlight. It wont autoset and communicate with the camera, but it will give you a lot in terms of "artistic freedom" and expression.
Postprocessing: Makes a world of difference. Photoshop is a gift from the gods to photographers. You very own, highly advanced darkroom. If you won't buy it, you can use The GIMP, which is free and also a very powerful editor.
Well, she is gorgeous, maybe that's all that matters.
Thanks for the looksee
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
If you ask me your comments are valid and I didn't think you came off arrogantly.
Still she is a beautiful girl and the tatt, while not my taste is well done. So I think that he captured what he aimed to capture at the time.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Yer. I don't think this was intended to be a '
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
jesus.
get analytical!
just let them upload a photo without being a douche.
well done, i like it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0