>>3291944Sorry if my vernacular isn't correct with this post. I am an amateur in all things, and only really know 3d cg terminology. I came here for an image to putt around with while learning the new gimp 2.10 release (image related).
>Would this have been served better by a smaller aperture? Ever since I got an 85mm I have been bokeh whoring out the ass, I don't wanna fall for the meme though.Meh, I like the effect. The cliche is very real, but it does look good so... meh?
>Could the shrubbery have used a little more definition?Nah, I like contrast rather than definition in the background. You get the feeling of detail without pulling the eye towards specific shapes IMO.
>Also what do you gois do for posing/directing your models or friends?Depends what you are doing. Professional clothing models do very specific poses. You can get away with pretty much anything if you are just being artsy... That said, I'd suggest looking into animation related character posing/movement (more specifically "lines of action"). This might be something that the model themselves would need to know, but I guess the photographer knowing it wouldn't hurt. This is the same idea that ballet dancers use when "posing" in their dances and the same idea that body builders use for their tournament poses as well.
[cont'd]
