Portraits - C&C please!

[Dramatis]

My friend was kind enough to sit for me today during a walkabout thru one of our nat'l parks. Only PP was some lightening in DPP and some use of the patch tool for blemishes. I only had natural light (and practically no shade) to play with and forgot my reflector (doh!). C&C welcome and appreciated!


1.

http://lh5.google.com/AJosh.Parker/R6eIsOTxFII/AAAAAAAAAEU/kTCwqBtIUig/s800/Umstead_0003RAW_Web.jpg

2.

http://lh3.google.com/AJosh.Parker/R6eItuTxFJI/AAAAAAAAAEg/O8gWS1gAc_A/Umstead_0007RAW_Web.jpg?imgmax=512

3.

http://lh5.google.com/AJosh.Parker/R6eIvOTxFKI/AAAAAAAAAEo/5ewwxnj5lpQ/Umstead_0010RAW_Web.jpg?imgmax=512

4.

http://lh3.google.com/AJosh.Parker/R6eIwuTxFLI/AAAAAAAAAEw/gCaq-e95sPI/Umstead_0016RAW_Web.jpg?imgmax=512

[Robert_Lay]

These portraits are all very interesting for a variety of reasons - in particular, the poses are very good.

I must ask you, however, what you think of the lighting that you were working in for these shots.

This lighting which looks to be about high noon on a very bright sunny day, is one of the worst lighting situations there is to deal with. First, if you have to have light from a bright sunny day, you would hope for it to be from a lower angle of sun - say early morning or late afternoon.

Next, it would be far better to find open shade on such a day - allow your subject to be illuminated by the open sky but not the direct rays of the sun.

Why, you say?

Look at the harsh effects of direct sunlight. Uncontrollable contrast with deep shadows - the bane of the photographer.

Nonetheless, you managed to get very decent Rembrandt lighting in your last pose, #4. It could use some fill light to soften the shadows, but the illumination is at least coming from the right direction, more or less, and the 3-dimensionality that is created by that lighting is certainly obvious here in #4.

[Dramatis]

These portraits are all very interesting for a variety of reasons - in particular, the poses are very good.

I must ask you, however, what you think of the lighting that you were working in for these shots.

This lighting which looks to be about high noon on a very bright sunny day, is one of the worst lighting situations there is to deal with. First, if you have to have light from a bright sunny day, you would hope for it to be from a lower angle of sun - say early morning or late afternoon.

Next, it would be far better to find open shade on such a day - allow your subject to be illuminated by the open sky but not the direct rays of the sun.

Why, you say?

Look at the harsh effects of direct sunlight. Uncontrollable contrast with deep shadows - the bane of the photographer.

Nonetheless, you managed to get very decent Rembrandt lighting in your last pose, #4. It could use some fill light to soften the shadows, but the illumination is at least coming from the right direction, more or less, and the 3-dimensionality that is created by that lighting is certainly obvious here in #4.

Thank you for the comments Robert!

I LOATHED the lighting. These were taken around 2-2:15 in the afternoon with absolutely no foliage to diffuse the light. Would've killed for some leaves on the trees. I tried putting the sun behind her with a tree functioning as a gobo but that just caused everything to be underexposed (picture #1). So I changed angles and had her turn three-quarters into the sun, trying to create some facial shadows.

If I had brought my reflector (doh!) I could've propped it up to throw some light back on the other side of her face to soften those shadows. Fill flash is, sadly, unavailable to me as I cannot get my 580EX II off camera yet. :(

I'm curious though, when you mention using the open sky to illuminate my subject rather than direct sun? How would I position my subject in relation to the sun, while still in shade, to achieve this?

[Robert_Lay]

Thank you for the comments Robert!

I LOATHED the lighting. These were taken around 2-2:15 in the afternoon with absolutely no foliage to diffuse the light. Would've killed for some leaves on the trees. I tried putting the sun behind her with a tree functioning as a gobo but that just caused everything to be underexposed (picture #1). So I changed angles and had her turn three-quarters into the sun, trying to create some facial shadows.

If I had brought my reflector (doh!) I could've propped it up to throw some light back on the other side of her face to soften those shadows. Fill flash is, sadly, unavailable to me as I cannot get my 580EX II off camera yet. :(

I'm curious though, when you mention using the open sky to illuminate my subject rather than direct sun? How would I position my subject in relation to the sun, while still in shade, to achieve this?

It never ceases to amaze me how few people understand "open shade", which is found on the North side of almost any structure. Of course, if you have no structures around, it requires some very dense foliage to accomplish the same thing. If your subject is completely in the shade and yet you can look up and see open sky directly overhead (as extensive as possible without including the sun itself) - that's open shade. After you've thought about it a while, it will become apparent that open shade gives you diffuse lighting. Also note that it's your subject that wants to be in the open shade - for yourself, that's optional, so long as no direct rays of the sun hit your lens.

[Dramatis]

It never ceases to amaze me how few people understand "open shade", which is found on the North side of almost any structure. Of course, if you have no structures around, it requires some very dense foliage to accomplish the same thing. If your subject is completely in the shade and yet you can look up and see open sky directly overhead (as extensive as possible without including the sun itself) - that's open shade. After you've thought about it a while, it will become apparent that open shade gives you diffuse lighting. Also note that it's your subject that wants to be in the open shade - for yourself, that's optional, so long as no direct rays of the sun hit your lens.

Well I am a newb to all this. But thank you for the info. Now that I know I'll be able to make better choices when it comes to setting up my shots.

[chauncey]

For a different, high contrast "look", you might try a B&W conversion.

[joedlh]

Fill flash would have opened up the shadows and drawn down the contrast.

[Dramatis]

For a different, high contrast "look", you might try a B&W conversion.

How's this Chauncey? Done with a Gradient Map adjustment layer.

http://lh3.google.com/AJosh.Parker/R6i8AeTxFUI/AAAAAAAAAHY/9gsHIKxmemY/FramedBritB%26W_Web.jpg?imgmax=512

[shutter_blitz]

I love them all. Great colors.