New gear, Portrait session with Ali. Tear it apart please!

[Clay Kerri]

Long time since I've posted here, thought I'd give you all a heads up!

Jumping shot
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4066/4253432432_31650c8480_o.jpg
Typical headshot
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4253338678_53009b945c_o.jpg
My favorite of the day :3
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4068/4252357099_9b5229144b_o.jpg

All my lighting info can be found on my flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/34959838@N04/

[vk2gwk]

Not much to tear apart.... :) All three nice shots without any (serious) technical flaws.

In #1 I would have preferred the gate to be a shade darker. The light frame takes the attention away a bit from the model.

In #2 The face and arms look a bit "hot" but that may be my monitor.... :)

#3: Very nice.

[pickupman92]

Nice work, def #3 is my fav. I like the teal/aqua color used.

[joedlh]

#1 My preference would be 1/2 f-stop less exposure on the model. It looks like the wall has the sharpest focus.

#2 Weird color to the eyes. If that's the effect you were going for, fine. But it doesn't look natural. Overall, she looks a little pink and, again, too lit up for my taste.

#3 Very nice.

[Flo]

#1 My preference would be 1/2 f-stop less exposure on the model. It looks like the wall has the sharpest focus.

#2 Weird color to the eyes. If that's the effect you were going for, fine. But it doesn't look natural. Overall, she looks a little pink and, again, too lit up for my taste.

#3 Very nice.

Agree with Joe. That last one is sweet.

[Clay Kerri]

Thanks guys!

Yeah, my shots all seemed to be a bit overexposed yesterday. I got a brand new beauty dish, along with my vagabond two this week, and the beauty dish just seems to throw ridiculously bright light. I just thought I'd roll with it and see what happened though.

[Casperd360]

#3 is amazing!!!

[tonydee]

#3 really is extremely good. The others are clearly outclassed. It's dark enough to be mysterious but suggestive, the pose looks almost euphoric and very engaging, drawing the viewer into an attempted analysis, and the mass of hair fills the space extremely well. DOF, angle of lighting and background all work very well. There's just the right number of elements, each contributing to the shot, and placed well around the frame.

As well as exposure issues, the composition of #1 and #2 is fairly symmetric and uninteresting. As the model is descending in #1, the dress puffs upward unflatteringly, though I appreciate the layering at the bottom may be an intended feature. It looks very contrived too.

You seem to be relying on the green eyes in #2 to carry the photo... they're the only strong element in the shot; suspiciously saturated and bright. By way of comparison, consider http://www.flickr.com/photos/karlf/274347136/ - the composition is much tighter, the colours more dynamic, the pose more engaging. Consider which elements you're trying to emphasise, and arrange them to maximum effect. #2 has a lot of brighter torso, arms and jewelry that dominate the lower half, and 50/50 divides aren't as flattering as some other proportions (Rule of Thirds, Golden Ratio...). That lower half doesn't have much variation in distance from the lens, colour or anything that would add interest. The eye doesn't flow around it, but pops from ring to necklace, down to the elbows disappearing into the bottom edge, not finding satisfaction. It's an effort to go from that dominant lower part up to the eyes, as there's a band of darkness separating the two, with some indistinct objects (a tiny hat? features?). That doesn't add up to any story or evocation to me, artistically or emotionally.

Cheers,
Tony

[Clay Kerri]

#3 really is extremely good. The others are clearly outclassed. It's dark enough to be mysterious but suggestive, the pose looks almost euphoric and very engaging, drawing the viewer into an attempted analysis, and the mass of hair fills the space extremely well. DOF, angle of lighting and background all work very well. There's just the right number of elements, each contributing to the shot, and placed well around the frame.

As well as exposure issues, the composition of #1 and #2 is fairly symmetric and uninteresting. As the model is descending in #1, the dress puffs upward unflatteringly, though I appreciate the layering at the bottom may be an intended feature. It looks very contrived too.

You seem to be relying on the green eyes in #2 to carry the photo... they're the only strong element in the shot; suspiciously saturated and bright. By way of comparison, consider http://www.flickr.com/photos/karlf/274347136/ - the composition is much tighter, the colours more dynamic, the pose more engaging. Consider which elements you're trying to emphasise, and arrange them to maximum effect. #2 has a lot of brighter torso, arms and jewelry that dominate the lower half, and 50/50 divides aren't as flattering as some other proportions (Rule of Thirds, Golden Ratio...). That lower half doesn't have much variation in distance from the lens, colour or anything that would add interest. The eye doesn't flow around it, but pops from ring to necklace, down to the elbows disappearing into the bottom edge, not finding satisfaction. It's an effort to go from that dominant lower part up to the eyes, as there's a band of darkness separating the two, with some indistinct objects (a tiny hat? features?). That doesn't add up to any story or evocation to me, artistically or emotionally.

Cheers,
Tony

THAT was criticism. Tony, I officially freaking love you haha. These are the kinds of things that I love to hear, because they really do help. Much appreciated!

[tonydee]

Much appreciated!

You're very welcome.

I must say, I keep coming back to see #3... it's really splendid. The lighting variation in the hair - from warm tones at left to cold greeny/blues at right - really is splendid. The textures are wonderful. Seeing that sort of shot reinvigorates my passion for photography, so many thanks to you too.

Cheers,
Tony

[Creepy Crawler]

I don't like to critique other peoples work because frankly mine sucks so I have no room to talk!!!!
But I will tell you what I think.
shot 1 I like it wish the wall was a little darker.
shot 2 I like it again but the eyes look way over done IMHO
shot 3 I LOVE IT wonderful

[francisparker]

I agree, #3 is a winner!

[MattMoore]

I like #3 as well, the first two are nice, but don't do anything for me.

[photonoob1]

i love the way you framed the first shot, excellent!

[Trelawney]

The number 3 shot is fantastic!