3 more from Carli's shoot, semi-nsfw

[Mike Panic]

again, most of these were horribly underexposed and i did my best to save them in photoshop... i now have learned my lesson on how to use the histogram on my camera, heh

http://www.mikepanic.com/photos/albums/carli_studio_march_12_2005/aad.jpg

http://www.mikepanic.com/photos/albums/carli_studio_march_12_2005/aae.jpg

http://www.mikepanic.com/photos/albums/carli_studio_march_12_2005/aaf.jpg

thoughts?

[iwatkins]

#3 is the shot for me, very, very nice. :)

Yes, I learnt the hard way. Had six blindingly good shots that I simply couldn't recover without sensor noise in a big way.

In a darkened studio, with black backgrounds, it is actually quite dark. But you have this LCD that you can see in bright unlight. So low key shots look brilliant on the LCD in the studio, but seem to be about 1 to 2 stops underexposed once on the computer. So I learnt to check histo. on the camera, and to trust your light meter (if you are using one).

Cheers

Ian

[Mike Panic]

ive found that turning the brightness down all the way on the lcd is perhaps the best thing anyone can do

[karusel]

I vote for #3 too. :D

I'm still learning (the hard way) to remember to check the LCD _everytime_ the scene changes. Especially when using flash, and even more especially when moving around. When I check it, I mostly only look at the histogram. It's quite unpleasant to tell the model the previous 30 shots (out of which at least 2 were pretty perfect) are ruined due to overexposure or, overexposure for that matter.

[CappuccinoDavid]

3 is nice but I like 2 if the bra was a little lighter, its too black and loses detail. But its a beautiful pose. Oh btw I looked at your web site and I like the pix.

[GyRob]

i like 3 and love the lighting.
Rob.

[charlesu]

I like number 2. Different. Wonderful!

[hollow]

I like no. 2 and I love no.3 :)
I would like no.1 too, but in my opinion, panties are a little distracting in this one. Try a different crop..or better try without them ! ;)