Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre People Talk 
Thread started 24 Apr 2015 (Friday) 15:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

How many lights were used, and overall what is wrong?

 
FredM
Member
113 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2005
     
Apr 24, 2015 15:31 |  #1

Not my picture, I can't even do this good. This looks like a single softbox light setup to me

http://mavsblog.dallas​news.com/files/2015/04​/morey2.jpg (external link)

Besides no shave etc, what went wrong here? Is this an acceptable workplace portrait in your view?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jcolman
Goldmember
2,663 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 638
Joined Mar 2008
Location: North Carolina
Post edited over 6 years ago by jcolman. (3 edits in all)
     
Apr 24, 2015 21:46 |  #2

The light is too close to the lens. I like a little contrast in my portraits. This is my typical business portrait look. I don't crop the photos so that gives the client a choice of cropping tighter if they wish. I use two or three lights. My key light is about 45 degrees off camera axis. I place a bounce card on the shadow side of the face to help fill in the shadow just a bit. My second light is used to light the background and my third (if I use one at all) is placed either as a "rim light" or above the client as a "hair light".

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i182.photobucke​t.com …trait-108_zpsduchraaw.jpg (external link)


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i182.photobucke​t.com …alecris-129A-8x11-800.jpg (external link)


However sometimes I will place my key light above the lens for older women.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i182.photobucke​t.com …oto/headshots/1​47-147.jpg (external link)

www.jimcolmanphotograp​hy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nogo
POTN record for # of posts during "Permanent Ban"
8,719 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 637
Joined Dec 2013
Location: All Along the Natchez Trace (Clinton, MS)
Post edited over 6 years ago by Nogo. (2 edits in all)
     
Apr 24, 2015 22:40 |  #3

It is pretty typical for a budget business portrait. The setup could be better, but it is not bad. Looking at the catch light in his eyes there is only one light source in this photo. Better lighting could help soften the hot spots on his cheeks, but they really don't hurt the photo in my opinion. Just something that could be done a little better.

The main thing I see is a lack of any detailed post processing. It looks like it was ran through Lightroom to get the levels and white balance correct and that was about all the processing that was done. The shaving bumps, a pimple on his neck, and some other spots in his photo would be removed if the photographer had spent any time on this photograph in Photoshop. The five o'clock shadow could be lessened, but why. If this man always looks like he has to shave three times a day, the lack of a shadow would just not look right for this man.

I believe a customer would be happy paying for this photo for business use but if he paid over $50.00 - $100.00 USD he probably would expect the photo to be a little more polished.


Philip

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tdlavigne
Senior Member
Avatar
364 posts
Likes: 108
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Post edited over 6 years ago by tdlavigne. (2 edits in all)
     
Apr 25, 2015 21:03 |  #4

Completely unacceptable in my opinion. Let's see:

No effort spent on retouching (yes, everyone needs a little), see: uneven skin tones, hair "growing" out of his ears, frizzies galore, shine on his face/cheeks

No effort spent on grooming/makeup/hair, see: stubble, hair on top of his head, sideburns, again skin tones/blemishes. Looks like he just wet his hair and ran his fingers through it.

No effort spent on making his wardrobe appealing, see: tie not properly tied, suit looking ill fitting, fold in shirt

No effort on a flattering light for his face, see: fairly hard light source, causing deeeeep and hard shadows, especially around inside of cheeks, edges of lips, under eyes. Causes face to look even "rounder" to put it nicely. Also eyes look dead and grey.

Probably more to it, but that's what jumps out at me. I think that any paying customer would be displeased with that, and even more so when you're the GM of a major sports franchise (ie. you've got money and you know and associate with others who do, and probably have better headshots).

JColeman's work is an example of what would be considered a good business portrait/headshot. I hope the photo in the OP is just a leaked "before" image that got out.

Edit: and as for lighting setup: one light on subject as evident by catchlight, possibly a semi-collapsed umbrella or octabox with baffle removed.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wallstreetoneil
Goldmember
Avatar
2,086 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 1217
Joined Nov 2014
Location: Toronto Canada
     
May 15, 2015 19:17 |  #5

Honestly, there is really NO excuse to have a double chin showing on 'almost' anyone - unless they are very overwieght. I would give this portrait a 0/10 just on that - forget about everything else. I would hope that this is just a test shot - because if this person is getting paid for this it is really incredibly awful.


Hockey and wedding photographer. Favourite camera / lens combos: a 1DX II with a Tamron 45 1.8 VC, an A7Rii with a Canon 24-70F2.8L II, and a 5DSR with a Tamron 85 1.8 VC. Every lens I own I strongly recommend [Canon (35Lii, 100L Macro, 24-70F2.8ii, 70-200F2.8ii, 100-400Lii), Tamron (45 1.8, 85 1.8), Sigma 24-105]. If there are better lenses out there let me know because I haven't found them.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhilF
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,737 posts
Likes: 521
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Valencia, CA
Post edited over 6 years ago by PhilF. (3 edits in all)
     
May 24, 2015 22:47 |  #6

looks like it was shot by someone who doesn't have enough experience in shooting portraits using strobes.

It looks very amateurish. Usually, people who hire people like this doesn't know what a good picture is and just settle for someone who has a dslr and some form of flash....like a co worker who is into photography. It happens a lot in my area.


http://philfernandezph​otography.com (external link)
http://www.philfashion​photography.com (external link)
https://www.instagram.​com/philfernimagery/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/philfphotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ksbal
Goldmember
Avatar
2,745 posts
Gallery: 374 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 2422
Joined Sep 2010
Location: N.E. Kansas
     
Jun 02, 2015 14:09 |  #7

I think there was more than one light.. Key and Fill.

The key (camera right) is too low, catch light is almost at 3 o'clock instead of between 1 and 2 o'clock.

The pose is not good. The shoulder toward us is the 'feminine' shoulder, and while we can debate if he is tilted that way or not, it *appears* to be - and you never want a guy posed like that for a business portrait. Strait or a slight tilt to the far away shoulder would be much better (or have the eyes/head strait but let the shoulders angle this way) You need to know how to set the feet to get the upper body to look better.

I would also say the fill needs to come down a stop in power.

I would have tried a different lighting pattern on him, with wide cheeks, he may have benefited from split lighting rather than the try for short lighting.

I would have turned his nose slightly more towards the key - and brought his chin forward (Peter Hurley - the Jaw technique)

and the highlights are pretty specular - need to knock down the shine, or use a white instead of silver umbrella - or both.

Things I would try to do differently. JMHO.


Godox/Flashpoint r2 system, plus some canon stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
Combating camera shame since 1977...
Avatar
9,923 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 2390
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jun 02, 2015 14:57 |  #8

You can see two light sources at the tip of his nose. The one on the left is maybe a strip light or a silver reflector.

Pretty terrible portrait, I do much better and don't at all consider myself a portrait guy.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alveric
Goldmember
Avatar
4,598 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 1059
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
     
Jun 02, 2015 18:40 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

LOL


'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
corposant
Member
41 posts
Joined Jan 2013
     
Jun 03, 2015 23:24 |  #10

There's another light source filling in the left side of the image. Agree with everybody - 0 for effort.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nathancarter
Cream of the Crop
5,474 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 609
Joined Dec 2010
Post edited over 6 years ago by nathancarter.
     
Jun 04, 2015 11:20 |  #11

corposant wrote in post #17583388 (external link)
There's another light source filling in the left side of the image. Agree with everybody - 0 for effort.

It's in focus (though not very sharp), appropriate DOF, reasonably well exposed (no clipped whites or shadows), white balance looks OK, and there are no background distractions. So, that's something.

It's absolutely unacceptable for an executive in any capacity, especially one in an industry where there's no lack of money being tossed around. But I've seen worse.


http://www.avidchick.c​om (external link) for business stuff
http://www.facebook.co​m/VictorVoyeur (external link) for fun stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dmitrim
Senior Member
Avatar
594 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 50
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Toronto,ON
     
Jul 01, 2015 22:39 |  #12

wallstreetoneil wrote in post #17557986 (external link)
Honestly, there is really NO excuse to have a double chin showing on 'almost' anyone - unless they are very overwieght. I would give this portrait a 0/10 just on that - forget about everything else. I would hope that this is just a test shot - because if this person is getting paid for this it is really incredibly awful.

As harsh as he made it sound, I am going to agree

1. light is too flat
2. image is at a lo angle, and that double chin is just looking at me... There are many many ways to avoid it.
a. shoot from higher up
b. ask them to move their head close to the camera


Facebook (external link)
www.dmitrimarkine.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,458 views & 6 likes for this thread
How many lights were used, and overall what is wrong?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre People Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bluredsky
792 guests, 224 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.