PDA

View Full Version : Another party (some glamour? - work safe)


Dimitry
18th of September 2005 (Sun), 13:25
This was on thursday night. Some shots didn't turn out as well because I *ahem* already had some to drink and by mistake turned down shutter speed instead of aperature ;)
Shots taken using the Tamron and Sigma. Let me know what you guys think.

Titus213
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 00:51
Dark! Looks like they need some levels work.

Desertraptor
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 00:58
Are these girls old enough to be drinking :)

MattyB
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 00:59
why do they have tissues on there head? :?

lol, nice capture, they actually look like they're having fun.

could possibly need some PS'ing like Titus suggested.

thanks for sharing

grego
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 01:02
Defintely underexposed. Some curves or levels would clean that up. :)

Dimitry
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 05:04
haha, they're both 21. The tissues were just a joke I had them do. :D
The lighting is what I still can't get. I didn't see those as dark myself.
So next time I'm shooting, do I add more flash?

malla1962
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 11:37
Look about 1 stop under to me,have a mess with levels.:D

JMHPhotography
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 13:23
They are dark... but there's a color issue as well. The white balance feels off to me. Looking at the levels and taking some color samples... I can see it clearly that there is a brownish orange hazy color casting.... I ran it through Photoshop and applied some of my processes. Cleans up really nice. Here's a downsampled version of the second one.

dsze
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 14:16
Let me know what you guys think.

Well, they look about 2 stops underexposed to me, the white balance is off, there are distractions in the background and they look like snapshots at a Frat party. Nothing that can't be corrected, but what was the purpose of these photographs? If they were intended as snapshots of drinking, then ok...but if they were intended to be portraits then;

Use more flash, bounced or diffused. Wider aperture and maybe custom WB setting. Oh, and don't cut them off the knees...either above or below.

Titus213
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 14:25
haha, they're both 21. The tissues were just a joke I had them do. :D
The lighting is what I still can't get. I didn't see those as dark myself.
So next time I'm shooting, do I add more flash?

Levels works well in post processing but the best plan is to get it right in the camera. Don't know what you mean by adding more flash but upping the ISO will give the flash a little more reach.

dsze
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 14:34
Yes, you could up the flash by either metering on the correct spot and/or using FEC.

Dimitry
19th of September 2005 (Mon), 17:01
FEC is what I meant. I have my rebel hacked.
These shots are mearly for snapshot of a moment, not really for a portrait. Just to capture the scene. Thanks for the all the help guys! :)

René Damkot
20th of September 2005 (Tue), 05:50
Like the first one. Took the liberty of applying PS to it; crop, assign sRGB, a little curves and a bit of hue-sat:
The remaining color shift adds to the atmosphere IMO. Don't think the flash should have been more; the proportion flash - ambient is okay (again: IMHO). Total exposure is off by at least a stop though. They look like they're having fun though.
edit: pic looks better in PS, little more contrast. My browsers color management must be off track :(

Dimitry
20th of September 2005 (Tue), 07:50
Yeah, wow, you're right. That looks so much better. I can now see how the other one is underexposed. So I shot this in manual mode, there for to expose it better, I should do what?
This one was taken at f5.6(I think) 1/20. The other one with the napkins was taken at f5.6 1/200. And they both look very similar in terms of exposure. Is it the aperature that I need to step up?

René Damkot
20th of September 2005 (Tue), 09:27
Probabely open up the aperture, or set a higher ISO (that's what I would've done) That way tou could get 'holdable' shuttertimes, and your flash would have an easier job, so less drain on the batteries/faster recharge. Maybe you wouldn't even need flash. Oh, and put the white balance to 'tungsten' (symbol of a lightbulb)

JMHPhotography
20th of September 2005 (Tue), 09:45
It's really better to underexpose than overexpose, you can correct it in photoshop. If you overexpose and light details get blown out, they are gone forever.

fatrat
20th of September 2005 (Tue), 10:38
They are dark... but there's a color issue as well. The white balance feels off to me. Looking at the levels and taking some color samples... I can see it clearly that there is a brownish orange hazy color casting.... I ran it through Photoshop and applied some of my processes. Cleans up really nice. Here's a downsampled version of the second one.

How did u do this?, it looks really good