Portrait lighting feedback please

I come before the critics humbly and with great trepidation seeking constructive feedback on this image especially with regard to lighting...thank you.:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

A lovely portrait. I like the way you've posed her. I believe it's a little "hot". Pretty harse lighting, but it could be my monitor. Perhaps over exposed. It's very sharp and perfectly focused. Nice work.

The lighting is un-necessarily harsh - especially just below the throat, it's blown out completely.

It's a nice pose and the exposure is good everywhere except where the lighting is too extreme. I like the backdrop - both color, texture and out of focus.

You're on the right track, just get that lighting under control - more diffusion and back off.

The picture reminds me of Dorothy from the wizard of Oz or that era

Im having the same problem making digital sharp pictures with new camera and older lighting = too bright and sharp. Leica V Canon Soft box V brolley

Soft focus lens on/V modern dig cameras is my current thoughts. Roberts lighting guide helped me but Im not there yet.

Robert shoud have an opinion on this comparison with his kit and obvious experienece.

chrnat wrote:
The picture reminds me of Dorothy from the wizard of Oz or that era

Im having the same problem making digital sharp pictures with new camera and older lighting = too bright and sharp. Leica V Canon Soft box V brolley

Soft focus lens on/V modern dig cameras is my current thoughts. Roberts lighting guide helped me but Im not there yet.

Robert shoud have an opinion on this comparison with his kit and obvious experienece.

I can usually make reasonably accurate guesses about the lighting that was used in a portrait. For example, in the one at hand, you can see that the catch lights in the eyes are quite large and round. That is valuable information. Also, you can see that the contrast indicated by the extent of the blown out highlights and the depth of the shadows is a good indication of how focused and harsh is the lighting from a particular source.

In this image you can count different shadows (look under her chin - look for two separate lines at two different angles) which indicate two lights are in use although you can only see evidence of one light in the catch lights. All of these indicators are helpful, but in the end it is still a lot of guessing.

I never try to recommend a particular kit for any purpose. What works for one person may not work for the next. However, I will say that you can get a lot out of ordinary household light fixtures - torchiere, desk lamps, table lamps, ceiling lights, floor lamps, etc. You can also purchase mail order very reasonably priced aluminum reflectors in different sizes with spring grippers to be used with extension cords. The important thing is to use common sense and a lot of subtlety. The brute force approach doesn't work.

You have to train your eye to look for the subtle shadows - that's all it takes to create the 3-dimensional look. You don't have to burn holes in things to light them up.

Generally speaking, no light should shine directly on the subject - it should all be diffused - either by transmission through diffusion materials or by bouncing off of reflectors.

Robert,

Look and you will learn - thanks - its in the detail.

I see the chin shadows now - not yesterday.

I actually see 2 catch lights I suspect one from the white screen on the hot shoe canon flash

I would welcome the photographer to describe the lighting which smacks of the main brolley being too close - hence too bright/hot

Just to help me understand the set up.