Website photo shoot

Here's a photo from a shoot I did yesterday for a website. The model is actually the person who owns the site, and one of the products she is selling is the tank top she's wearing. Here's the info on this shot:
Canon 5D MkII
Canon 50mm f/1.4 @ f/4.0
Av
ISO 100
Lighting:
The sun was behind the building, so I used a hand-held 52" reflector on camera left to bounce some light on to model's right side.

Post processing was done in Photoshop.

Critique and comments very welcome. I am relatively new to the game and appreciate any thoughtful input and pointers. Thanks!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

If you are trying to sell the shirt, I'd think that the shirt should be a little more "in focus". I don't mean that in the literal way, just that it's such a small portion of the picture AND it's hard to read. I can definitely make it out, but still.

I like the shot itself, just don't believe it's the best way to sell her product Good job otherwise!

CaityB wrote in post #7766581
If you are trying to sell the shirt, I'd think that the shirt should be a little more "in focus".

I agree with you 100%! I should have mentioned though, that the photo will be used a part of a composite layout where a closeup of the shirt with the logo and/or text, as well as the sizes and colors available would clearly be seen. This photo, if used, would be the "backdrop" so to speak for the advertising.

givtu wrote in post #7766499
Here's a photo from a shoot I did yesterday for a website. The model is actually the person who owns the site, and one of the products she is selling is the tank top she's wearing. Here's the info on this shot:
Canon 5D MkII
Canon 50mm f/1.4 @ f/4.0
Av
ISO 100
Lighting:
The sun was behind the building, so I used a hand-held 52" reflector on camera left to bounce some light on to model's right side.

Post processing was done in Photoshop.

Critique and comments very welcome. I am relatively new to the game and appreciate any thoughtful input and pointers. Thanks!

Something wrong here. When the sun is "behind" a structure, such as the building here, then the near side of the building should be in shadow - not the brightest thing in the scene.

There is some terribly obvious patchwork being done to her left armpit. What is that all about?

Last but not least, if the sun is somwhere in front of the camera, as you seem to be saying, why on earth do you want to shoot into the sun?

Bob, I think you are being sa bit too harsh here. If you forget the technical issues for a moment, I think the image is cool. I love the gritty look of it, but that may be just me. Having said that, I think it'd be wise to follow what Bob says, cause he's the guru round here

By the way, did you create that frame yourself in PS or is that a plugin?

givtu wrote in post #7766675
I agree with you 100%! I should have mentioned though, that the photo will be used a part of a composite layout where a closeup of the shirt with the logo and/or text, as well as the sizes and colors available would clearly be seen. This photo, if used, would be the "backdrop" so to speak for the advertising.

Ah, I see. That makes a LOT more sense

Metalstrm wrote in post #7767468
Bob, I think you are being sa bit too harsh here. If you forget the technical issues for a moment, I think the image is cool. I love the gritty look of it, but that may be just me. Having said that, I think it'd be wise to follow what Bob says, cause he's the guru round here

By the way, did you create that frame yourself in PS or is that a plugin?

You are quite correct - the picture is fascinating, both in regard to the idea and in the execution. I should learn to be more fair and balanced.

Whatever is going on with her armpit is distracting.
Great shot though.

Robert_Lay wrote in post #7767364
Something wrong here. When the sun is "behind" a structure, such as the building here, then the near side of the building should be in shadow - not the brightest thing in the scene.

There is some terribly obvious patchwork being done to her left armpit. What is that all about?

Last but not least, if the sun is somwhere in front of the camera, as you seem to be saying, why on earth do you want to shoot into the sun?

Some very valid comments here.
I'll answer them all.

"the near side of the building should be in shadow - not the brightest thing in the scene"

Yesterday here in Houston was a very bright day. The time was around 4 PM and the sun was just peeking over a huge oak tree just behind the building. The model and bike were both in the shadow cast by the tree and this bare sheet metal building. Although still brightly lit by ambient light, the shade softened the light hitting this side of the building, and as you can see, the shadows are not as harsh as they would be from the hard light of direct sunlight.

"There is some terribly obvious patchwork being done to her left armpit."

I did nothing special to her armpit. I see what everyone is talking about and I know exactly what it is: The light from the reflector on camera left, which is being held by an assistant, is being partially blocked by her body, creating the harsh contrasty lighting you see on her arm where it becomes the armpit. In retrospect, I should have perhaps thrown a little fill flash or changed the reflector's angle of incidence to minimize this anomaly.

"Last but not least, if the sun is somwhere in front of the camera, as you seem to be saying, why on earth do you want to shoot into the sun?"

Being that the sun was still at a 45 degree angle in the sky, it was much too harsh to shoot out in the open without something to break the direct sunlight. We chose instead to shoot in the open shade cast by the building and tree, and this put me, by reasons of physics, shooting in the direction of the sun. However, the sun's position being just above the top of the tree, coupled with the use of a lens shade, eliminated any flare that might have otherwise occurred.

Metalstrm wrote in post #7767468
By the way, did you create that frame yourself in PS or is that a plugin?

It's a border created by someone else I found on deviant art, under "Free Stock." I just dropped it on top of the photograph, resized it to fit, and changed the blending mode to color burn.

Her pose os overly contrived. It kills the image for me. It just stands out as a "Hey, stand like this" pose. Does not look natural or comfortable at all. The rest of the shot I like. Except the selective color.

givtu wrote in post #7771632
Some very valid comments here.
I'll answer them all.

"the near side of the building should be in shadow - not the brightest thing in the scene"

Yesterday here in Houston was a very bright day. The time was around 4 PM and the sun was just peeking over a huge oak tree just behind the building. The model and bike were both in the shadow cast by the tree and this bare sheet metal building. Although still brightly lit by ambient light, the shade softened the light hitting this side of the building, and as you can see, the shadows are not as harsh as they would be from the hard light of direct sunlight.

"There is some terribly obvious patchwork being done to her left armpit."

I did nothing special to her armpit. I see what everyone is talking about and I know exactly what it is: The light from the reflector on camera left, which is being held by an assistant, is being partially blocked by her body, creating the harsh contrasty lighting you see on her arm where it becomes the armpit. In retrospect, I should have perhaps thrown a little fill flash or changed the reflector's angle of incidence to minimize this anomaly.

"Last but not least, if the sun is somwhere in front of the camera, as you seem to be saying, why on earth do you want to shoot into the sun?"

Being that the sun was still at a 45 degree angle in the sky, it was much too harsh to shoot out in the open without something to break the direct sunlight. We chose instead to shoot in the open shade cast by the building and tree, and this put me, by reasons of physics, shooting in the direction of the sun. However, the sun's position being just above the top of the tree, coupled with the use of a lens shade, eliminated any flare that might have otherwise occurred.

Everything you say helps me to understand the scene better than my guesses. The one thing that still baffles me is how the building in the background could glow so brightly when it is in open shade, but then it is Texas