Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment People 
Thread started 14 Jul 2011 (Thursday) 20:38
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Ashley Pt. 2

 
this thread is locked
Nickc84
Goldmember
Avatar
2,063 posts
Likes: 77
Joined Jul 2010
     
Jul 16, 2011 22:35 |  #31

amonline wrote in post #12770081 (external link)
Katie, don't lower yourself to belittled arguments. There are thousands of pieces of art that have been shot during the last century without "the correct lighting". It was obvious to nearly everyone else in this thread that these were natural light, candid, snapshots. It is also obvious the images were for fun more than anything else and I'm beyond sure that your friend loved the results.

Keep up the good work. Don't let others with narrow-minded opinions ruffle your feathers. ;)

+1...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Nickc84
Goldmember
Avatar
2,063 posts
Likes: 77
Joined Jul 2010
     
Jul 16, 2011 22:44 |  #32

My 2 cents...... My wife's uncle. He's always quick to judge others photos and rambles on about his 30 years of experience as a pro and is a member of a bunch of photography clubs and calls himself a professional but only managed to shoot 5 weddings in 10 years (4 family) when in reality...his work is nothing a 10 year old couldn't do with a canon point and shoot.

keep up the good work.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ivann
Member
244 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Jul 17, 2011 01:37 |  #33
bannedPermanent ban

Very nice photos man! I agree with people saying that studio lighting shots are boring some times.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 17, 2011 10:54 |  #34

Thanks everyone. You're all exactly right. I really shouldn't have allowed myself to stoop to his level. I really appreciate the encouragement!

Swanfreekx, I used Lightroom for post production on all of them. For #8, I lowered the temperature, bumped up the recovery as well as the brightness, clarity and contrast. I did the same with the shadows and darks. I desaturated the blues quite a bit and saturated the reds just a little. For the highlights and shadows, I brought up the hue and saturation. That's pretty much all I did. I mostly experimented with Lightroom until I found settings I liked and made presets.

Amonline, I think I agree with you. She should be shot in color. I think I might revisit #1 and #2 and play with the color version. Thanks for the tip!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 17, 2011 17:26 |  #35

Nickc84 wrote in post #12771138 (external link)
Nice shots! Nifty 50 1.8 is such a killer lens ...i keep telling people !


I love the nifty fifty! It makes such sharp pictures. I'm thinking of renting a 70-200L and a 135L for her wedding. I'm excited to see how those pictures turn out! Thanks for the comments. I feel like some people in the photography business who have been in it for a long time just don't like to see styles change. I'll always be trying different styles and experimenting with new techniques. That's what makes it fun!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jough
Senior Member
Avatar
266 posts
Likes: 31
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jul 17, 2011 17:31 |  #36

Can you do some skin smoothing to get the freckles out?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 17, 2011 17:41 |  #37

jough wrote in post #12774747 (external link)
Can you do some skin smoothing to get the freckles out?

Whaaat? Not a fan of freckles, eh?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maderik
Junior Member
Avatar
26 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Cape Canaveral, FL
     
Jul 17, 2011 17:54 |  #38

jough wrote in post #12774747 (external link)
Can you do some skin smoothing to get the freckles out?

Why would you do that? Seems like ordering escargot and then asking the waiter to remove the snails from your plate. While the model has great bone structure, why make her look like a thousand others?

Katie, I think the photos have a wonderful casual intimacy and very good use of available light. #1 is a bit hot for me on the cheek but that's a quibble.


--
Erik
http://www.pbase.com/m​aderik (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 17, 2011 18:35 |  #39

maderik wrote in post #12774850 (external link)
Why would you do that? Seems like ordering escargot and then asking the waiter to remove the snails from your plate. While the model has great bone structure, why make her look like a thousand others?

Katie, I think the photos have a wonderful casual intimacy and very good use of available light. #1 is a bit hot for me on the cheek but that's a quibble.

Thanks for the critique! Yeah, I think I should lower the exposure some. I was actually thinking of converting it back to color. What do you think?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
keny
Senior Member
Avatar
771 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Pointe-Calumet Qc, Canada
     
Jul 17, 2011 18:44 |  #40

natural eyes or fixed in PS? nice set!


“Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst.”
Body: 5D markII
Lens: 50mm f/1.8 Nifty Fifty!
Light: 5 in 1 Reflector countable, for the moment?:rolleyes:

Pixel-Mania Photography© - 500px (external link), FaceBook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maderik
Junior Member
Avatar
26 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Cape Canaveral, FL
     
Jul 17, 2011 18:47 |  #41

KatieAnne wrote in post #12775044 (external link)
Thanks for the critique! Yeah, I think I should lower the exposure some. I was actually thinking of converting it back to color. What do you think?

I prefer the color versions because the model has such striking coloring. But then again with such a model it's nice every now and then to avoid that distraction and just concentrate on shape. So I also like the high-key B&W but I would not have put two of them first in the sequence -- maybe just one towards the end is enough.


--
Erik
http://www.pbase.com/m​aderik (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanZ
Senior Member
297 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2011
     
Jul 17, 2011 18:54 |  #42

Where is the improper lighting? I thought those shoots are great.


7D | Speedlite 430EX II x 3 + PixelKing | 70-200 f/2.8 II | 24-70 f2.8L | 50mm 1.8
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alanzhaonys (external link)
500px: http://alanzhao.500px.​com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 17, 2011 21:03 |  #43

maderik wrote in post #12775093 (external link)
I prefer the color versions because the model has such striking coloring. But then again with such a model it's nice every now and then to avoid that distraction and just concentrate on shape. So I also like the high-key B&W but I would not have put two of them first in the sequence -- maybe just one towards the end is enough.

I agree with you. I guess I wasn't really thinking about the sequence when I posted, but I should pay more attention to that. I kind of like the second one in B&W, but I think the first will look much better in color. Thanks!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 18, 2011 08:38 |  #44

Edit #1

IMAGE: http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6024/5950054981_efb409e9f9_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56081665@N02/5​950054981/  (external link)
Ashley-9 (external link) by hepler_katie (external link), on Flickr

I feel like the right side is distracting in color. Should've watched what was in the background. What do you all think? Otherwise, how's the color version?



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Benji
Goldmember
2,203 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2006
Location: North east Indiana
     
Jul 18, 2011 09:16 |  #45

Ok, critique time. Since no one else wants to give any real constructive critique that will help this young lady improve her photographs. I will.

Image 1. The best lit areas are the side of her nose and her right cheek. Had she been properly posed with her body at a 45° angle to the camera (thereby slenderizing her body) that would have also brought the main light in at an angle that would have lit her face better without her having to resort to an extreme twisting of the neck which always looks strange. It is these little things that portrait artists both painters and photographers have been doing for 500 years that make the difference between a "nice photo" and a "wow great photograph." Old school? Sure is. Still needed? Sure is.

Image 2. The main light was positioned on the wrong side of her face. When the main light is positioned like this (opposite the side that she parts her hair) the hair leaves a shadow across the eye thereby darkening it. Also she is flat to the camera making her body appear wide. Does any woman want to look wide? The last 50,000 women I have photographed have wanted to look thinner but this is the new millennium, maybe they don't care if the look thin anymore.

Image # 3. Same lighting as in # 1 but now her body is turned too far which makes her head look overly large for the small base it is sitting on. The body should be turned at a 45° angle and the main light should cast pleasing shadows.

Image # 4. Her flat hand is nearly as large as her entire face and the brightest lit area is her chest. The brightest lit area of any portrait should be her face. The side of the hand photographs much better than does the flat of it, and all that is required is a simple turn of the wrist.

Image # 5. Again her chest is the brightest lit area of the entire image and again her body was turned too far away from the camera. Had the main light been at camera right instead of camera left her chest would have been in shadow and her face would have received the brunt of the main light. Also the main light was too low. The main light catchlight should be at the 11 or 1 o'clock position in the eyes.

Image # 6. Again the main was too low and she is broad lit. Broad lighting tends to widen the face.

Image # 7. See critique of # 6. Also the critique of # 2 plus her cheek is overexposed.

Image # 8. Her right cheek is overexposed and there is something white at camera left hanging across her shoulder that looks out of place. An artifact perhaps?

OK, now that you have received some legitimate critique from a real working professional photographer and photographic instructor you can do one of two things. Ignore me (I assume you will choose this one) in which case your work will stay the same or take my advice, resolve these issues, learn from a professional and you will grow and your work will improve. The choice is up to you.

Most newbies don't want to learn the rules of good portraiture, preferring instead to shoot from the hip and get lots of praise from fellow newbies that also don't know anything about what separates good portraiture from thought out but nevertheless pretty snapshots, but pretty soon the bubble will burst. It happens to all of us. We get our first real shoot with a real customer (not a friend, classmate or workmate) and we decide to begin charging some decent money. We shoot just like we have been shooting you know the same type of shots that gets all the raves from our friends, but the client doesn't like the work. She says things like "she doesn't look quite right in any of them, but I can't put my finger on it" so they either don't buy anything, or they buy just buy a few dollars worth. The image maker is MAD so the image maker posts the images for critique to justify her hurt feelings in the hopes that her fellow newbie photographers will come to her rescue. She does get a few" she was a jerk, these are beautiful shots" comments but she also gets a number of honest critiques which hurts. This will prove to either be her undoing. She will do one of two things. She quits being a "professional" photographer and returns to her real daytime job or she digs in and accepts the critiques offered by well intentioned people who only want to assist her in becoming a better photographer. I have seen this exact scenario quite a few times in the last 30 years, in fact this exact same thing happened to me, but I swallowed my pride, quit listening to my "friends" about how "beautiful" my work was and began taking harsh critique of my images.

Benji




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

13,163 views & 0 likes for this thread
Ashley Pt. 2
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment People 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Tom Ekblad
954 guests, 368 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.