SOOC with new cheap lighting kit

Last week I bought one of those $100 inexpensive Linco 3 continuous lighting kits. Here are 3 of the shots straight out of the camera. I know there are some hot spots but so far how did I do?

Lighting looks pretty good, skins looking a bit over processed.

These are straight out of camera. Not anything done to them yet.

The lighting on him is fine. I'm not so high on the black backdrop for this photo. Grey or even blue would look better to my eyes.
The pose in #2 bugs me a little. I generally try to have men doing that pose turn the back of their hand to the camera. Women I have show the side of the hand as he's doing. Just a preference.

The first pose is natural and the framing is spot on. The lighting looks good. I prefer slightly cooler white balance but no complaints for this image. Pack a lint brush on your next shoot. The second shot pose isn't as effective imo. Framing could be better. Too much headroom and the blue sleeve at the bottom stands out.

When you say SOOC, is that raw processed with application (PSP?) defaults or jpg straight from the camera? The two seem to be used interchangeably. If jpg from the camera, which picture style did you use?

Lee

Uneven lighting of eyes. On bright, one in shade.

Produces noticably different pupil size in each.

RealMadKiwi wrote in post #18313482
Lighting looks pretty good, skins looking a bit over processed.

I don't get this at all. Anyway...

To me if anything needs work it is the skin. The shiny section of the nose needs to go. Also maybe tone down the sides of the face a little, but that is your decision.

Burn the right side of his head at his hair it is blending into the background.

It would be easy to create a layer and change the background to a dark grey if you feel the subject needs some more operation.

Is there a reason you're shooting at iso640 in studio conditions? I don't think I've ever found a reason to increase my iso in a studio? Are you able to raise the power on the lights slightly to allow for a drop in the iso to 100/200?

ready to snap wrote in post #18313009
Here are 3 of the shots straight out of the camera.

RealMadKiwi wrote in post #18313482
skins looking a bit over processed.

Ermmmmm OK

The black is the only backdrop I have right now but more coming real soon. I can see your point on the pose. Thanks for the reply.

aezoss wrote in post #18313709
The first pose is natural and the framing is spot on. The lighting looks good. I prefer slightly cooler white balance but no complaints for this image. Pack a lint brush on your next shoot. The second shot pose isn't as effective imo. Framing could be better. Too much headroom and the blue sleeve at the bottom stands out.

When you say SOOC, is that raw processed with application (PSP?) defaults or jpg straight from the camera? The two seem to be used interchangeably. If jpg from the camera, which picture style did you use?

Lee

Thanks Lee. Like I said no editing has been done to these yet so the cropping and other fine tuning will be done. As for the headroom the 2nd picture is better because you always have think about headroom lost when framing or different print size ratios. This shoot I shot in the raw+jpeg mode.

BlackBull wrote in post #18313892
Is there a reason you're shooting at iso640 in studio conditions? I don't think I've ever found a reason to increase my iso in a studio? Are you able to raise the power on the lights slightly to allow for a drop in the iso to 100/200?

This is one of those cheap lighting kits with only 40 watt fluorescent bulbs. I am going to check on some higher wattage bulbs.

I think the odd catchlight in the bottom of the eye is a bit distracting. And there's a few 'hot spots" you could probably do without. At the adult ed college I teach at, their old continuous light tungsten bulb kit needed quite a high iso to get a reasonable exposure. No problem with that, but keep iso as low as you can.

Lighting looks flat and uninteresting. Was the light straight on? If so, try moving it off to the side. Could really use some separation from the BG. A simple hair light would help. Just my 2 cents.

Neither of the lights were straight on. When I say new to this light set I really mean new. I opened the lighting kit 15 minutes prior to the pictures. I didn't mess with the boom yet for the hair light. I had the subject about 6-8' from the background.