PDA

View Full Version : Fantastic Portrait ... How?


bpuppy
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 08:05
I found this image on Flickr in looking for posing ideas ...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/eiluj/93442667/in/set-72057594056410566/

My Question is, what lens do you think the photog. used for this? Would you go as far as the 85 f/1.2L, or do you think it could be the 50 f/1.4 or even a 2.8 zoom? There's no EXIF data attached.

This kind of quality in a portrait is what I aspire too ... this photo made me gasp when I saw it.

Mocking-DX
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 09:55
not an expert on this but i think your 50 1.4 can do it wide open
a 70-200 2.8 wide open and zoomed all the way to 200mm is also very good

but any fast long lens can do it-85, 135,200mm
just my thoughts

rlhphotos
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 10:23
Its a nice picture but her right side is way to bright...see how blown out it is on that side no details left to the flowers..its a nice photo but I dont gasp when I see it..you could easily attain the same thing with 50mm 1.4

JaertX
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 10:41
I don't think the DOF is narrow enough for it to be a prime, wide open. Still just an opinion, but I would guess this was stopped down a good bit...I think my 85mm f/1.8 will get the nose and eyes in sharp focus and almost the ears at about f/4 or f/5.6. Color saturation could just be PP. But it's just a guess...

ootsk
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 11:07
There ARE a few things that make this a nice portrait. If you're intersted in the soft background, part is the lens, but you can just move her farther away for some of the same effect.
Do note her facial angle to the camera, that she's "short lit", and how the flowers balance out the normally akward 4x6 crop for portraits.
All easily duplicated.
Give it a try.

CyberPet
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 12:16
I guess it's a mix of things, like short DOF, fairly wide open aperture, etc. Could even be a Tamron at 75 mm at f/2.8, so I wouldn't say it's "this or that lens". But it's a very appealing portrait and it looks like they used some type of reflector to work on the left side, since the rigth is pretty blown. The framing with the green background and the flowers is great, and I'm envious at any photographer who know how to pose people to look their best.

hodgy
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 13:11
I would say even a 28-70 zoom at 70 can yield the same results. I use my 70-200 F2.8 all the time for portraits like this.
http://www.hodginsphotography.com/wedding05.html

ootsk
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 15:00
I don't mean to hijack this thread, but you do great work hodgy...

bpuppy
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 17:13
I changed the image to a link ... I didn't realize that context was not enough to keep me out of Copyright purgatory.

tim
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 18:43
I really like that image, the only ways I can see to make it better is to tame the highlights on the right a bit, and add a backlight, but that'd take some work.

hodgy
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 19:38
I really like that image, the only ways I can see to make it better is to tame the highlights on the right a bit, and add a backlight, but that'd take some work.


?

I wouldn't do this on either of the images, especially if I'm outside snaggin a candid shot.

tim
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 19:45
No, not for candids... but if you had studio time I think it often adds to images.

NGrinerPhoto
5th of March 2006 (Sun), 21:20
hodgi ... where did you get the shaved down negative carrier boarder?

hodgy
6th of March 2006 (Mon), 08:56
Tim, in studio an image like this would be completely different.

NG I created it, and then created an action. Takes a few minutes.

rlhphotos
6th of March 2006 (Mon), 09:53
I would say even a 28-70 zoom at 70 can yield the same results. I use my 70-200 F2.8 all the time for portraits like this.
http://www.hodginsphotography.com/wedding05.html

Now thats a nice portrait..

BLINN
6th of March 2006 (Mon), 14:38
Boys and Girls,....meet Hodgy. A.K.A. James Hodgins. IMO one of Ontario's best photographers, along wiht Rob that is.:lol:

DocFrankenstein
6th of March 2006 (Mon), 17:03
I have to agree with others. It doesn't seem like an open lens.

It can be even f/4 f/5.6 on full frame...

hodgy
7th of March 2006 (Tue), 13:46
Hey Blinn, another fellow Scudsburian. Thanks for the compliments, but there are farrrrrrrrrrrr better photographers than me in Ontario :) Thanks anways though. :)

LeaderXXX
8th of March 2006 (Wed), 07:13
Guess 50mm f1.8...:lol:

BLINN
8th of March 2006 (Wed), 09:21
James very humble, very humble. Still though in my opinion you and Rob are still the best. I think that NEOB photographer of the year 2005 and 2002 is just the start. I could only dream to be half as good as either of you. Oh well, us rock farmers have crops to tend to, oh wait....there's 10 feet of snow out thier. I guess I will have to wait until spring now to plant my pebbels. LOL