C&C: My first headshot

Well my first semi-pro one. I did it for free as I'm still new and this is a friend but I am all but conducting myself as if I were getting paid. I used YN 2 off camera flashes and a reflector for a few of these. Canon 6D with 70-200mm f/4L IS.

This will be for a corporate profile so it should look professional. I have a few others but I think these are the best three. Please help me chose which is best and maybe offer some critique.

I kind of like the one with the kicker light camera left. It obviously has some blown out highlights but I think it also slims the subject the best. I shot some at a down angle but my wife says that they don't look good.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1371.photobuck​et.com …8e41f6cef_zpsb4​0af986.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i1371.photobuck​et.com …8ac8307aa_zpsa4​7aacbf.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i1371.photobuck​et.com …az21185/1_zpsc5​43c1e0.jpg

I agree that #2 is the best of the three. You managed to get the most genuine smile from your subject in that frame but it seems OOF compared to the others. The lighting in all of them is too harsh for this style of portrait. The light coming from below your subject in #1 and #3 is not flattering at all.

Not one of them is good, to be honest.

The shadows are all in the wrong places (chiefly those from the nose and the spectacles), and you grossly blew out the highlights in #2.

It's not so much a question of quality of light (hard vs. soft), but of quality of lighting, which in this case is lacking. Back to the drawing board and practice, practice, practice.

Alveric wrote in post #17427472
Not one of them is good, to be honest.

The shadows are all in the wrong places (chiefly those from the nose and the spectacles), and you grossly blew out the highlights in #2.

It's not so much a question of quality of light (hard vs. soft), but of quality of lighting, which in this case is lacking. Back to the drawing board and practice, practice, practice.

id have to agree looks like the lights are too hard and to low as in position shadows are very unnatural looking?

Thanks all for the brutal honesty. The truth hurts--but not as much as not knowing. I am embarrassed to admit that I forgot my large parabolic shoot through umbrella. For the key light I had one of those pocket diffusers on hand, but obviously the light is too harsh in summarizing the comments.

Right now I'm planning to print these out and take them too him and offer to reshoot. With the umbrella I should mitigate most of the spectacle shadows as well as soften the overall complexion, right? Worth doing with only two off camera flashes? These were shot at night so maybe if we tried for an afternoon shoot the reflector could become a third light source. I would guess he will just take his favorite of the three and call it good--he was just planning on using his iPhone at first

Just leaving hard vs. soft out of it, IMHO, the key light is definitely too low in #1 and #3 giving a non-flattering look. Try raising that light so the subject is lit from above while still getting the catch light in the eyes.

Silver-Halide wrote in post #17428287
Thanks all for the brutal honesty. The truth hurts--but not as much as not knowing. I am embarrassed to admit that I forgot my large parabolic shoot through umbrella. For the key light I had one of those pocket diffusers on hand, but obviously the light is too harsh in summarizing the comments.

Right now I'm planning to print these out and take them too him and offer to reshoot. With the umbrella I should mitigate most of the spectacle shadows as well as soften the overall complexion, right? Worth doing with only two off camera flashes? These were shot at night so maybe if we tried for an afternoon shoot the reflector could become a third light source. I would guess he will just take his favorite of the three and call it good--he was just planning on using his iPhone at first

Thanks for accepting the comments graciously.

To expand a bit on quality of light: it's both perfectly possible and perftectly valid to use hard light only for portraits and obtain good results –for both men and women. It's all a matter of position of the light (learn the portrait patterns –Rembrandt, open loop, closed loop, Paramount...) and the right ratios.

I wouldn't call this photo superb, but it's an adequate example:

As noted above, when lighting a portrait, the position of your main light should be among your top considerations. The main light should almost never come from below the subject - this is reserved for some kinds of specialty portraits, such as monsters and wizards, or pulp-novel damsels who have just stumbled across a still-warm body. Not for a business headshot, that's for sure.

This becomes especially important for a subject with a "soft" jawline or a little bit of pudgy chin. By placing the light relatively high, you cause the jaw to cast a shadow on the neck& throat, which gives a slimming effect. If there's no shadow under the chin, you're making the appearance of a much fatter neck. (note - sometimes I "cheat" and add a very subtle burn in post-processing, to further emphasize the jawline and slim the neck. but this should be the exception, not the rule)

You can also slim the neck by having the subject lean in a little bit. Search Youtube for Peter Hurley's "It's All About the Jaw" video.


You can sometimes get by with a bare/hard kicker light, even if it blows out highlights a little bit. It depends on the nature of the portrait. I sure wouldn't do it for a business headshot, but I might do it for an athlete, or a rock star, or portraits that need a more contrasty/edgy look.

Or, you can use a bare kicker light, and turn it down low so it just gives a very subtle definition and separation, without overpowering the rest of the image.

On hard vs soft light:
As Alveric said, you can definitely light a portrait with a small, hard light - as long as it's positioned properly. Putting the light too low is a rookie mistake that everyone makes, but is very easy to correct.

Hard light will bring out texture, wrinkles, blemishes - especially if the light is placed off to the side. Soft light from way off to the side will do the same thing, to some extent. You can minimize the appearance of shadows by bringing the light closer to the lens - but this isn't always what you want.

Take a look at this image, the one in the book's cover pictured there:

https://farm3.staticfl​ickr.com …0547201103_96a6​8fbea0.jpg

That photograph was made with a bare bulb (about the hardest light you can have, not counting the sun). Photographer Gregory Heisler wanted the image to look as if it had been made in sunlight: quite a tall order, that photo, since it's white on white.

Ok I did some more reading and I'm going to try another idea: using my Canon 430 ex II as an OCF/"on axis" fill flash and it will trigger the key and rim light as off camera slaves. wont have to fiddle around with the reflector and yes, I'll post the umbrella up much higher and angle it down to hide that double chin

I'd advise against using frontal flash, however dim, with spectacled subjects.

Oh yeah--good point

Ok guys, round 2. Brought the parabolic umbrella and raised it up.

C&C Please.

Here's another. too bad he wasn't smiling. I had the light higher in this one and you can see that in his hair/scalp and his chin naturally casts a better shadow. I 'burned' the neck area in the previous photo to attempt to slim it a little.

Thanks for all the help.

The more I look at his smile the more I think maybe the non-smiling is better. Plus the added benefit of the much better lighting in the second one. The first looks washed out. Agree/disagree?
Remember: this will be for a job application.