|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I'm glad your work is improving because... quite frankly there was a lot of room to improve at first. Are you being compensated well by the mag?
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2010 04:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:11 |
|
|
The two gym owner ones are the weaker ones of the set, ironically. They aren't as flattering and seem more like off-the-cuff candids as opposed to portraits. The second, third and fourth are great and do a good job of showing personality and describing the subjects. The first is decent but I think it would be more interesting if she were in the stands as opposed to out on the field. It would bring more of the background elements into play as opposed to being a mere backdrop. Plus if she were in the stands, she wouldn't be squinting one eye from the bright sun. Despite how you feel about the execution of the third, I think it's the best of them all because it's fun, it's detailed without losing the subjects and you really get a sense that these guys are doing what they love.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2010 04:47
|
|
|
Oprah Haza posted:I'm glad your work is improving because... quite frankly there was a lot of room to improve at first. Are you being compensated well by the mag? Thanks, I'm pretty much new to the whole thing, I mean aside from black and white in high school. I jumped back into it a year and a half ago. This forum has helped me out tremendously. I know I have a ton to grow still, and I get a teeny bit better each time. Technicals aside, getting the people comfortable is way harder. I am getting paid a bit of cash to help pay my bills, but this magazine is a little different. The people who started and are involved see it as a means to an end. The purpose of the magazine is not really to make a magazine, but as another avenue for building a small business community. All the contributors are giving up their time in order to build stronger relationships and network with other business owners. I'm not making enough cash to quit my day job yet, but I am building a portfolio of images that I want, getting experience, and more importantly making contacts and relationships. This is very far from working for free by some organization who sees no value in what I do. Everyone I've met has been super helpful and understanding that I am just starting out. I've been working with them since the beginning of the year and the ancillary work from those I've met has kept me almost even. HPL posted:The two gym owner ones are the weaker ones of the set, ironically. They aren't as flattering and seem more like off-the-cuff candids as opposed to portraits. The second, third and fourth are great and do a good job of showing personality and describing the subjects. The first is decent but I think it would be more interesting if she were in the stands as opposed to out on the field. It would bring more of the background elements into play as opposed to being a mere backdrop. Plus if she were in the stands, she wouldn't be squinting one eye from the bright sun. The gym owners were really tough for me because I couldn't relate to them at all, I couldn't really strike up much of a conversation. I had them kind of pose and work with their clients while I photographed them. They felt awkward and I couldn't get them to relax. To contrast, I had a great time with the movie theater guy talking about what dicks the MPAA are and how hes going to survive the whole day and date releases. With the surf shop owner, we talked about how great it feels to follow a passion and a freedom to do what you want. And the Harley guys were all laid back anyway, didn't seem like anything could bring them down. The soccer lady couldn't open her eyes up much more. She had some kind of eye thing with a detached retina in one eye. I wasn't sure how to make the stands work because there wasn't much room between where the stands end and the field begins. Thanks for the Harley crit, I kind of feel like its too busy still, but I was so nervous asking them to move around the bikes a whole bunch. I wanted to bring them forward more and put more depth behind them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2010 06:15
|
|
|
I think a fun idea for the soccer lady would be to have her in front of the stands, have her hold a soccer ball then get down on a knee and shoot upwards with a wide angle to get a sweeping view of the stands with her towering in front in kind of a grand "I own this poo poo" way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2010 22:59
|
|
|
Few from today with a friend who was back in town that I've been wanting to shoot for a while. http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com/2010/06/zenshoot.html  This one I think needs to be seen large. My favorite from the shoot. 
poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 13:54 on Jun 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2010 22:09
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted: Hey, i'm on to your tricks, that's a mirror image.Really well done. I probably wouldn't have noticed it so quick if I hadn't seen your other work before. The forward most tree well placed but its light is inconsistent with its surroundings.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2010 22:19
|
|
|
Had a really limited amount of time to take this shot, so it's generic, but I like it. The light in the room was actually that orangey. Q: how do I get rid of the hot spots? Move the light closer? I had the umbrella pretty close already.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2010 22:28
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:
Parts are mirrored, but that front most tree isn't, it was right where it is. I only mirrored for the green bushes, as there was a road with people walking and cars in the background of that side.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2010 22:38
|
|
|
Don't know if this is the correct thread for this. If not, my apologies, and feel free to move it. Background: Most of what I do is portraits of families. But I've also shot some fashion. Next month the MUA I work with and I are to shoot some models from an agency. It's a legit agency, albeit a fairly small one. We've worked with them before. At the moment there's going to be six models there - four have experience and the other two are part of their 'new faces' thing. The idea is to expand the portfolios of the first group and get some basic shots/looks for the second. The studio is booked from 10:00 until 21:00. I've every confidence in my ability and that of the MUA. The studio's well equipped. I've backups for my equipment. However I've no experience of shooting for that amount of time. So I'm wondering if there's anything you think I should consider or be aware of. Even it it's something that might seem relatively trivial. I want to get this right. While I know what they want is pretty generic and cliched, I still need to make sure I meet a certain standard. So if anyone has any advice about such a scenario, please feel free to offer it. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 03:52
|
|
|
And a quick writeup of that shoot: http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com/2010/06/zenshoot.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 13:54
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:And a quick writeup of that shoot: http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com/2010/06/zenshoot.html I really should read your blog more often.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2010 19:24
|
|
|
After being sick for a while and not really feeling it, I got invited to check out a super hard core muscle guy body builder gym and take some pictures. It was a lot more difficult than expected. I have very little experience shooting men and even less shooting to define body features rather than hide them. These are my poor results. Anyone have any suggestions on how to better light to enhance?    
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 17:11
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:After being sick for a while and not really feeling it, I got invited to check out a super hard core muscle guy body builder gym and take some pictures. Try more side-lighting. It always makes forms and textures stand out a lot. (Don't side-light women in most cases unless you like photoshopping skin)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2010 20:56
|
|
|
My nude series is on the back burner for now - my model has mono.  Here is awesome hair guy.   
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2010 00:55
|
|
|
I met a drunken hobo in the town square, and took a few shots. They're not "flattering", per se. There was so many directions I could take, but here are a couple I did  
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2010 03:09
|
|
|
I was hired by a local dance company to shoot both the recital and portraits for their Spring performance. I had shot them a couple times before, but for a coworker, and never got paid. This time, my coworker was not in the performance, but the company called me up to come out. So sometimes doing stuff for free, for the right people, can turn into paid work. They really enjoyed these. I think they could be better, I should've used the 85mm more, but I ended up using the 35 for the bulk of the photos because It was easier to frame.    And I wanted to take them into a weirder setting, like the playground next door, but they wanted to keep it more subdued and traditional.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 18:55
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I was hired by a local dance company to shoot both the recital and portraits for their Spring performance. I had shot them a couple times before, but for a coworker, and never got paid. This time, my coworker was not in the performance, but the company called me up to come out. So sometimes doing stuff for free, for the right people, can turn into paid work. They really enjoyed these. I think they could be better, I should've used the 85mm more, but I ended up using the 35 for the bulk of the photos because It was easier to frame. Man, the backgrounds in these are a wreck. Maybe with some CAF or some extensive cloning and such, you could clean them, but as it stands they are super distracting. To me these images look like they should have been shot on seamless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 19:09
|
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:Man, the backgrounds in these are a wreck. Maybe with some CAF or some extensive cloning and such, you could clean them, but as it stands they are super distracting. To me these images look like they should have been shot on seamless. The backgrounds are definitely cluttered, but I personally like the shadows/light cast by the windows. Maybe cleaning everything else up as a compromise, but leaving the patterns? Here is some lovely cloning and cropping. Could use a little color correction, too, I think...just maybe cut the greens down some? And now that I look at it also take out that darker green corner on the middle right.  [e] whoops I totally cloned out her tiara. Well, that's whatcha get when you wear tiaras. orange lime fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Jun 25, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 19:53
|
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:Man, the backgrounds in these are a wreck. Maybe with some CAF or some extensive cloning and such, you could clean them, but as it stands they are super distracting. To me these images look like they should have been shot on seamless. Ah, are they just too distracting because of the bright spots, or overall a terrible choice of background. This was the second floor of the venue they were performing in. CAF?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 19:54
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Ah, are they just too distracting because of the bright spots, or overall a terrible choice of background. This was the second floor of the venue they were performing in. CAF? No, like Orange Lime said, the light in the background is nice, it's everything else that is a problem. CAF = content aware fill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 20:44
|
|
|
(regarding the ballet photos) I also feel like they'd be stronger as black and whites, I dunno, to me ballet is a "classic" take on dancing, and making it look vintagey or even black and white would make them stronger, I'll take a stab at one if you dont mind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 21:22
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:(regarding the ballet photos) It's cool with me, I hadn't thought about a black and white look, and I've never been able to pull off that vintage feel very well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 21:26
|
|
|
Maybe something like this?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 21:34
|
|
|
I do like the tighter crop you guys are suggesting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 21:54
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:It's cool with me, I hadn't thought about a black and white look, and I've never been able to pull off that vintage feel very well. If they were my photos I would desaturate the greens and oranges more and maybe mask in an un-edited version of the subjects so you don't screw up their skin tones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 22:12
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I do like the tighter crop you guys are suggesting. I think that's rule number 1 of portraits: Fill the Frame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2010 22:13
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:I think that's rule number 1 of portraits: Fill the Frame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2010 01:20
|
|
|
Interrupting Moss posted:Arnold Newman says 'gently caress you' I would argue that in this shot that frame is pretty filled.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2010 01:37
|
|
|
well, that's the thing about photography "rules" -- once you know them, you get to break them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2010 03:49
|
|
|
My friend wanted to play dress-up and I needed off-camera lighting practice. The first three were right before dawn, going for a walking-home-after-a-party-under-moonlight look.   Switch outfits as dawn broke and none of them came out except this. I wanted to machete that bush out of existence.  Feel free to point out every mistake. I wish I'd scouted the location first. We're doing more shoots this Summer so this was glorified practice, the first time I've really had a go with  STROBES
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2010 07:27
|
|
|
pwn posted:My friend wanted to play dress-up and I needed off-camera lighting practice. The first three were right before dawn, going for a walking-home-after-a-party-under-moonlight look. What was the lighting set-up on the second and third? I think those turned out well light wise. I think the poses could be a bit more interesting, or maybe a prop could come in handy. Something like a rock or a fence might be nice to have the model interact with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2010 07:32
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:What was the lighting set-up on the second and third? I think those turned out well light wise. I think the poses could be a bit more interesting, or maybe a prop could come in handy. Something like a rock or a fence might be nice to have the model interact with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2010 08:25
|
|
|
pwn posted:Thanks. She did bring a weird wooden stonehenge-looking bust, I will need to get more creative in the posing department. The lighting was an unmodified SB-600 camera-left slightly behind her on the second. The first and third are camera-right slightly in front. The exposures were around 1/5 to let enough ambient in on her right and the scenery. Very nice. I'm looking to maybe do something like this, and that light looked perfect, good to know I can probably get away with it on my 430exii. To add, I went back to some earlier shots and worked a bit more post on them, and took suggestions from the Dorkroom to fix them. They're my quickest viewed shots ever:  
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2010 09:13
|
|
|
More lighting practice with a friend of mine. I've been keeping it really simple to try and get to really know the limited lighting kit I have. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2010 03:04
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Over the past month, I've done a ton of portraits of business owners for a magazine I'm working with. The surf shop photo is your best. The line leads into his face, his store looks enticing and you get a sense of all forms of surfing, and this guy's place in it. The three guys on Harleys is keen, you're right that the tires look very bright but it's absolutely fine. Did you know 5000 miles is a standard life of a motorcycle? The movie theater one looks great. The way he relates to the space is good, and the space is exciting. My eyes moved around a lot here. The gym owner, because of her facial expression and posture, looks harsh. If that's what you're going for, it works. The last guy looks the most lost in his surroundings. His desk isn't particularly exciting like the surf shop. When you're trying to get someone comfortable, try to ask a few questions about them. Research their business. What do they dislike? What's the best part of their job? Use silence if their answers could be better (breaking it first tells them you're going to always break it first). All these people own businesses, right? They want to SHOW OFF! Ask them about them and you'll be a hit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2010 03:33
|
|
|
pwn posted:My friend wanted to play dress-up and I needed off-camera lighting practice. The first three were right before dawn, going for a walking-home-after-a-party-under-moonlight look.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2010 22:37
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2010 23:01
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Is it me or are those highlights completely blown? (forehead, arms, nails, boobs, all on the light's side) No they're pretty blown out. I don't have any idea how to fix it though. I ran levels and it looked better, than I tried the Highlight/shadows thing and it made it look worse, so I stuck with this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2010 23:15
|
|
|
Not blowing them out in the first place would help (turn on the blinkies!), but yeah once it's done there's not much you can get out of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2010 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:11 |
|
|
This is sort of a snapshot, since the pose was impromptu, but I had him recreate it so I could snap a couple more. I know the hair at the top is a bit distracting, but it was windy. Any advice would be great since my pictures of people usually suck balls. Also advice on the BW conversion would be awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2010 00:53
|
|
