POST YOUR HEADSHOTS!

CyberCat wrote in post #18406451
The pic seems to be completely out of focus.

It is - 1/20, F5.6, ISO 400 is a Canon Semi Automatic mode setup. The histogram shows it a stop underexposed so the flash wasn't doing enough to stop the action so you are seeing ambient motion blur at 1/20th

DaviSto wrote in post #18406852
It's not Kliphe's image ... which is bang on the eyes in focus ... it's another one higher up that is being referred to.

The reply does (indirectly) indicate which. The photo actually referred to is, it's fair to say, a little bit soft (like 'when you put your reading glasses on to drive the car' soft ... in my case).

I see now. I was going to say that image seems to have motion blur rather than being out of focus, but wallsreetoneil beat me to it.
Kamen

Love both of them. What draws ME most to the B&W one is the shining of her eyes competing with the lights in the background.

NIIIICE!

I was testing a rented Voigtlander lens with my Olympus camera and thought my son needed a prop here, so handed him the camera and snapped this with the Canon 6D.

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …50351453@N08/35​940878922/

"Click"

Another take of the same person. I tried following the suggestions from the previous one. Short of better retouching, what would you say this one would be missing to be up to standards? Thanks for the feedback!

KamenG wrote in post #18411957
Another take of the same person. I tried following the suggestions from the previous one. Short of better retouching, what would you say this one would be missing to be up to standards? Thanks for the feedback!

Hosted photo: posted by KamenG in
./showthread.php?p=184​11957&i=i182857917
forum: People

Kamen

Your main light is still too low, and the nose casts a shadow that runs laterally across the cheek: this is not flattering: you want the shadow to fall obliquely, so as to create a triangle on the cheek, either in Rembrandt or loop (open or closed) patterns.

Your fill light is too bright as well and it seems to be casting a second shadow on the left side of the face, and also making the hair to cast a shadow on the right side. Generally, you want your fill light to be at the 0-45 position. Copy setups (i.e. equidistant lights on both sides of the subject) do not work well for portraiture.

What ^^^ he said and this https://www.slrlounge.​com …ommon-key-light-patterns/

Thanks! This time I lifted the main light (you mean the key light, right?) as high as it could go (~7 ft); I also tried getting it closer to the subject to further increase the incident angle, but it was getting a bit too harsh, so I backed it out. I increased the intensity of the fill light, as suggested the previous comments, but I may now have gotten it too high. Not sure that's the problem. I didn't follow an exact recipe but I've had in mind these kinds of setups from Photographyweekend. I will experiment further when I get a chance.

Kamen

KamenG wrote in post #18412033
Thanks! This time I lifted the main light (you mean the key light, right?) as high as it could go (~7 ft); I also tried getting it closer to the subject to further increase the incident angle, but it was getting a bit too harsh, so I backed it out. I increased the intensity of the fill light, as suggested the previous comments, but I may now have gotten it too high. Not sure that's the problem. I didn't follow an exact recipe but I've had in mind these kinds of setups from Photographyweekend. I will experiment further when I get a chance.

Kamen

I suspected you had indeed lifted the light; however, the head leaning done by the subject changed your illumination pattern!

Head tilt, rotation and lean must be carefully considered and integrated with the lighting. No, I am not saying that you ask people to always pose as in a passport photo; only to be continuously paying attention to how shadows fall across their faces and how these change when lights or body parts are moved around. Modelling lights help immensely with this.

In your case, the head leaning didn't help you. Yet, there are cases in which winning portraits are made by moving the body instead of moving the lights. Take a situation contrary to what you normally have: a light that is too low. You can still get Rembrandt, Paramount, or loop patterns by asking the model to tilt her head downwards.

Additionally, without moving a well placed light that gives you, say a Rembrandt pattern when the model is facing the lens head on, you can obtain a second portrait with Paramount pattern by asking the model to turn her head towards the light.

Experiment a bit, simply by putting your camera aside, turning on your modelling lights to full power, and, placing yourself in the camera position, directing the model through several poses all the time looking at how the shadow cast by the light changes.

Actually, shortly after I wrote the above I realized it had to be the angle relative to the face. Thank you for taking the time to explain in details! Given that only one of my monolights has a modeling light (a modest 65W), and the other two are $17 AC strobes screwed into $6.50 sockets with $15 softboxes on $11 light-stands, I have few mechanisms to work with, but it is good to know what to work on.

One more question: do you feel like the rim/hair light is lacking?

Kamen