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
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 18, 2011 10:10 |  #46

Benji wrote in post #12778298 (external link)
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

Duly noted. I accept honest critiques, and I appreciate them, too. There were two other photographers taking pictures at the same time, and we all fought for good shots, and I think I did pretty well. And might I just add, this is a hobby of mine. Have I mentioned AT ALL yet that I'm making this a career? Why, no. I simply want to make photos that people enjoy and photos I'm proud of, and I feel like I've done so. If you don't like them, that's perfectly fine. I'm a baker, not a professional photographer, and I NEVER stated otherwise. I am here to learn from the best, and well, your work just doesn't really do it for me. So, I will consider your critique and try to fix some things... just like I did with the other critique I've received thus far. But otherwise, I'm done with your arrogance and pomposity. Thank you.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 18, 2011 10:13 |  #47

Nickc84 wrote in post #12771176 (external link)
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.

Are you sure your wife's uncle isn't on this forum? :P




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amonline
Goldmember
Avatar
3,558 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2006
     
Jul 18, 2011 10:13 |  #48

Wow. Someone really has some issues. Sometimes, photography is just supposed to be fun. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 18, 2011 10:20 |  #49

amonline wrote in post #12778615 (external link)
Wow. Someone really has some issues. Sometimes, photography is just supposed to be fun. ;)

Right?! :D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Jul 18, 2011 12:35 |  #50

Nice series. A beautiful model definitely helps, but you managed to capture her well. I really like the details in the face and the eyes. I prefer the color version of #1, probably because it shows more details.

Take my comment for what it is... I don't have 30 years of professional expertise, but I enjoy this hobby :P


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KatieAnne
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
     
Jul 18, 2011 19:53 |  #51

sebr wrote in post #12779445 (external link)
Nice series. A beautiful model definitely helps, but you managed to capture her well. I really like the details in the face and the eyes. I prefer the color version of #1, probably because it shows more details.

Take my comment for what it is... I don't have 30 years of professional expertise, but I enjoy this hobby :P

Thanks! Yeah, everyone sold me on the color version.

Honestly, the opinions of those who find joy in photography are the ones that matter!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maderik
Junior Member
Avatar
26 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Cape Canaveral, FL
     
Jul 18, 2011 19:54 |  #52

KatieAnne wrote in post #12778125 (external link)
Edit #1

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?

Yes, it is distracting because she is looking at it. A vignette or burn helps a little, but IMHO cloning it out is better. My cloning skills are not great but:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

--
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 18, 2011 20:10 |  #53

maderik wrote in post #12781861 (external link)
Yes, it is distracting because she is looking at it. A vignette or burn helps a little, but IMHO cloning it out is better. My cloning skills are not great but:

That looks so much better! I need to get CS5 soon. All I have at the moment is Lightroom. You definitely saved that photo.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maderik
Junior Member
Avatar
26 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Cape Canaveral, FL
     
Jul 18, 2011 20:32 |  #54

BTW, the hardest part of critique is discerning the artist's intent. Most of Benji's comments would make the images better fit the classical mode and be more commercial but is that what you wanted? The images are casual and essentially candid in feel so would those classical posing cues spoil that? I suppose the only way to know would be to have shot both but it sounds like that wasn't an option this time. It's a tough call: do you have to know the rules to successfully break them?


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markspan6243
Member
Avatar
82 posts
Joined Apr 2011
     
Jul 18, 2011 20:41 |  #55

what a cutie


Canon 60D|18-135mm 3.6-5.6|50mm 1.8|70-300mm 4-5.6

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
C4121S
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Jul 18, 2011 21:13 |  #56

love the freckles. add's so much character to the photograph!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
m.shalaby
Goldmember
3,443 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Dec 2009
     
Jul 18, 2011 22:46 |  #57

Benji wrote in post #12765031 (external link)
All the praises you are getting above will only hurt you as none of the shots were lit properly or lit well, but hey who wants to listen to old guys who have been in business for 30 years. What can they know.

Benji

don't worry OP, some people are just angry miserable individuals trolling these boards with nothing but negative things to say...

nice shots all around :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
m.shalaby
Goldmember
3,443 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Dec 2009
     
Jul 18, 2011 22:48 |  #58

Benji wrote in post #12778298 (external link)
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

wow - and appearantly more time on their hands than they know what to do with....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lindsaytblum
Goldmember
Avatar
2,540 posts
Joined May 2008
Location: Chesterfield, MO
     
Jul 19, 2011 12:16 |  #59

Beautiful, #6 and 7 look totally editorial.


Canon 7D | 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 135mm f/2.0L, 100mm f/2.8L IS USM, 85mm f/1.8
Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TMR ­ Design
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
23,883 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Huntington Station, NY
     
Jul 19, 2011 12:49 as a reply to  @ lindsaytblum's post |  #60

So this is apparently what happens when people actually try to help. You guys want to attack and chop up people that are spending time and energy and truly trying to offer assistance that will make a difference rather than just patting everyone on the back with "awesome shot" comments.

Do you even know Benji? Have you ever read any of the countless tutorials he's written and posted here and on other forums? Have you seen his work? Have you ever engaged in conversation with him to find out whether he really knows his s*it or not?

I suspect the answer to all of those questions is no. What a shame.


Robert
RobertMitchellPhotogra​phy (external link)

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

13,160 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 Croxie
529 guests, 252 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.