Recreate this style of portrait

Hi everyone,
I've got a booking to do a few head shots for an architecture firm like this example next week.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/jpeg'

i'd use the 50.. prob at 1.8 or 2.2... depending on ur natural light probably a diffused flash from left or right, above eye level. try not to mix natural and flash lighting or you'll have a hard time adjusting in the PP.. good luck.

huebert wrote in post #14335407
Hi everyone,
I've got a booking to do a few head shots for an architecture firm like this example next week.


I'm thinking short depth of field, possibly a reflector and natural light. I've got a 24-70L & a 50mm 1.8, would these be able to get what I'm after? I may be able to rent another lens if need be.

Sound about right?


cheers

Well if you want to be close to that example - turn on MF and don't focus at all.
Seriously - so out of focus on example it hurts my eyes.

I didn't think they were really anything I would ever want to recreate. Maybe something got lost when they were resized and posted to the web. Out of focus, really soft, WB seems inconsistent, and looks like some channels are clipping in the top left one.

Yup, these are all terrible photos from almost every perspective. Out of focus, partially blown-out highlights, bad lighting on faces, static body front poses. Turn the subjects' bodies about 45° sideways, and don't position them in the center of the shot if you want to include some of the environment as well. You'll also need off-camera flash to do a good job.

just use your camera phone. that'll do the trick.

And don't forget: Background matters! Even if you use a narrow dof.

The obligatory: are these your shots? If not you should probably post a link instead of embedding

drmaxx wrote in post #14344360
And don't forget: Background matters! Even if you use a narrow dof.

Very true! The first two have passable backgrounds, but on the last two, the first thing I noticed was how random and distracting the background is. Environmental portraits are great but that isn't an excuse to completely ignore the framing and background

thanks guys, the example is a screen shot from the brief PDF that i received - so that would explain the quality.

These look like nothing but straight cell phone camera snap shots. I don't see any indication of care taken with selecting the environment (nothing indicative of who these people are or what they do) and no care in making sure the background was not distracting.

Mixed lighting, raccoon eyes from overhead lighting, there is nothing right with them.

HughR's points are all relevant.