|
Oprah Haza posted:Session - she wanted very serious looks These don't look serious to me. They look blank, to be honest. And maybe a bit uncomfortable as a result. She's so stiff that it doesn't look like you captured much of a moment like you're going to want to in fashion/glamour. I'm just not sure what the motivation is for her looking so stern, yet dressed in sexy things. EDIT: Also what torgeaux said.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2011 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:53 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Yeah, a lot of that is just the limitations of the bedroom I was shooting in - the mattress was a bit spongy so she tended to sink into it. Yeah that makes total sense. There are no rules in photography that cannot be broken, so in the end once the setup is made the way you want, I think it comes down to your own preference  But great work nonetheless, she's gorgeous. What was your lightning setup like?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2011 18:45
|
|
|
Took these for a friend at work. Hosting is mine!   Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2011 19:04
|
|
|
The first seems to emphasize the scar a bit too much, but the second and third I quite like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
xenilk posted:Yeah that makes total sense. There are no rules in photography that cannot be broken, so in the end once the setup is made the way you want, I think it comes down to your own preference Just natural light! keeps things simple
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2011 20:13
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Just natural light! keeps things simple The three on the bed are all natural light? Did she have a window back right and you just bounced it in? How'd you achieve the pure white background?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2011 09:56
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:The three on the bed are all natural light? Did she have a window back right and you just bounced it in? How'd you achieve the pure white background? window directly right of her, and just metered for her body so the background overexposed to pure white
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2011 12:48
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:These don't look serious to me. They look blank, to be honest. And maybe a bit uncomfortable as a result. She's so stiff that it doesn't look like you captured much of a moment like you're going to want to in fashion/glamour. I'm just not sure what the motivation is for her looking so stern, yet dressed in sexy things. I totally agree. It was her first time really in front of a camera (she's a photographer) and her first time in swimwear/lingerie with someone she'd never met before. We spent a lot of time going over poses/expressions but she was incredibly nervous and tired (this was at like 10 pm). I told her to wear loose clothing without ties/waistbands but that didn't happen and we didn't have time to wait.      
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
Pretty sure most dorkroomers aren't gonna be a fan of the post, but I dig it. untitled shoot-8.jpg by zachary.spradlin, on Flickr  untitled shoot-3.jpg by zachary.spradlin, on Flickr  untitled shoot-6.jpg by zachary.spradlin, on Flickr I'm just glad we got to go out and shoot some more, it's been a while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2011 20:47
|
|
|
RizieN posted:Pretty sure most dorkroomers aren't gonna be a fan of the post, but I dig it. I dig those Although I believe that I would have asked her to give me her sunglasses on the first picture and maybe would have changed the composition a little bit (I'm more a fan of horizontal pictures) but overall I like it!As for mine...Crosspost pictures from SAD Shot two friends yesterday  IMG_6297 by avoyer, on Flickr  IMG_6100 by avoyer, on Flickr  IMG_6164 by avoyer, on Flickr  IMG_6210 by avoyer, on Flickr  IMG_6232 by avoyer, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2011 20:57
|
|
|
enjoyed both of your posts. h5!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
RizieN posted:Pretty sure most dorkroomers aren't gonna be a fan of the post, but I dig it. I like the second the most but I would have cropped it differently with more empty space on the left. I like the processing though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2011 21:04
|
|
|
RizieN posted:Pretty sure most dorkroomers aren't gonna be a fan of the post, but I dig it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2011 21:25
|
|
|
n0n0 posted:I like all three of them. If I were your client, I'd be satisfied. However, the shadow behind your model on the ground in the first photo is kind of a distraction... it shouldn't be there. It's not consistent with visible light sources. It seems like an 'accident' to have a shadow there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2011 10:16
|
|
|
You know I never noticed the shadow at first but now it's bugging me a bit. It's because I didn't want the background to be super blown out, but I also wanted her exposed properly, so I popped my speedlight on and shot it that way. Thanks for all the feedback everyone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2011 16:20
|
|
|
I feel like that would be a really easy fix in post. Just use CAF and go from there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2011 16:55
|
|
|
Crosspost from SAD Impromptu shoot with people  IMG_6419 by avoyer, on Flickr  IMG_6408 by avoyer, on Flickr  IMG_6392 by avoyer, on Flickr  IMG_6366 by avoyer, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 14:04
|
|
|
Thoogsby posted:I feel like that would be a really easy fix in post. Just use CAF and go from there. Yea, it would be super easy to fix, but I'm not worried about it right now cause it's just a shot for our semi-fashion/photography blog which doesn't have a whole lot of followers. And the blog gives me an excuse to shoot photos like this. But if I used it for anything other than the blog I'll definitely clean it up, and know to look out for that stuff next time I use a speed light. xenilk; Those are pretty sweet, I don't have any actual crit for you but I like the compositions and what you've done with the colors - more so the first two than the second though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
This staged reveal of his tatooo is really awkward. People don't walk around with one sleeve rolled up to show off their ink. Well, if they do it makes them douchebags. But my point stands. I would have liked to see a much more natural situation for a portrait. EDIT: Now for something nice to say. I usually would hassle the photographer about showing slightly crooked horizon lines, but I think it works really well here. The angle of her head leaning in is complimented well by the angle of the lines behind her. It makes the whole picture more dynamic. It's very subtle, but good catch. McMadCow fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Aug 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 16:51
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:This staged reveal of his tatooo is really awkward. People don't walk around with one sleeve rolled up to show off their ink. Well, if they do it makes them douchebags. But my point stands. Hahah love your first critique, very true! He wanted a James Dean cigarette pack rolled in the sleeve kind of look so I went for it But I agree, it does look very staged since nobody walks like that (and he's not a douchebag so he doesn't)I'm having a really hard time working with a male subject, I will have to work on it... the postures/positions of the hands/body just doesn't speak to me as much. Thanks a lot for the critique, it's very appreciated
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 19:17
|
|
|
xenilk posted:I'm having a really hard time working with a male subject, I will have to work on it... the postures/positions of the hands/body just doesn't speak to me as much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Solution: make fantabulous gay friends. Bring them to shoots. That or girls. But gay dudes are better. Bring them to help me shoot the guys? That could be an interesting idea.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
There are enough gay photographers shooting men that it's not a unique or interesting perspective. I'd be more interested what comes from a straight photographer shooting male models than a gay or female one. I'd think of "cool" actors or celebrities you like and research shoots they've done for esquire etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 23:42
|
|
|
The singer I shot a few months ago is as gay as a birthday tablecloth but he's a good actor and he's got good awareness in front of a camera. I'm sure that's the actor part not the gay part. Jimmy Again by McMadCow, on Flickr  Jimmy in the City by McMadCow, on Flickr Yes I'm straight. Although apparently not convincingly enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 00:20
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:There are enough gay photographers shooting men that it's not a unique or interesting perspective. And yet, there are 50x as many straight male photographers shooting attractive women, but those kind of images are still the most popular both here in the dorkroom, and in society as a whole. Just sayin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 11:40
|
|
|
xenilk posted:I'm having a really hard time working with a male subject, I will have to work on it... the postures/positions of the hands/body just doesn't speak to me as much. You need to figure out body language. If you are just relying on what you like to see a woman do, even if that gives you easy quick results, you'll still be stunted as a photographer. Know what kind of body posture speaks different things about people, go to the mall and do life drawing (don't worry if it's poo poo) and pay attention to what makes a person look upbeat, or down-trodden, or what makes a member of the military easy to spot even when sitting (straight back, shoulders up). If you know what body posture says, you can get men or women to pose in a way that works with your shoot idea. Not every shot of a woman do you want them looking slinky and sexy, sometimes some shoots might require some manliness, or aggression, etc. Knowing body language will aid in this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 11:43
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:And yet, there are 50x as many straight male photographers shooting attractive women, but those kind of images are still the most popular both here in the dorkroom, and in society as a whole. How does that have anything to do with what I said and what the poster asked? I think it'd be a cop out if he tried to bring a "fantabulous" gay friend to a shoot rather than trying to find what *he* finds interesting in shooting men. Paragon8 fucked around with this message at 12:09 on Aug 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 12:03
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:You need to figure out body language. If you are just relying on what you like to see a woman do, even if that gives you easy quick results, you'll still be stunted as a photographer. Know what kind of body posture speaks different things about people, go to the mall and do life drawing (don't worry if it's poo poo) and pay attention to what makes a person look upbeat, or down-trodden, or what makes a member of the military easy to spot even when sitting (straight back, shoulders up). If you know what body posture says, you can get men or women to pose in a way that works with your shoot idea. I think that's pretty much what I'm lacking; knowledge of the male form/shape and knowing which postures I like/am looking for in a male model. I'll have to take a deeper look of male model/actors pictures. I think what makes it so hard is that there are much less content (to my knowledge) available for male models. I mean for women you have America's/Australia's/UK next top model + tons of magazines you can use as reference. Thanks for the tips I am also planning to buy sketch books, even tho it might come out not that pretty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 13:49
|
|
|
xenilk posted:I think that's pretty much what I'm lacking; knowledge of the male form/shape and knowing which postures I like/am looking for in a male model. http://www.boysbygirls.co.uk/ http://homotography.blogspot.com/ NWS! Shooting men is getting to be really trendy in fashion. Paragon8 fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Aug 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:33
|
|
|
xenilk posted:I think that's pretty much what I'm lacking; knowledge of the male form/shape and knowing which postures I like/am looking for in a male model. What kind of shots are you looking to take? Is this going to be health/fitness, fashion, adventure, general living, etc. ? If you want lots of interesting pictures of guys, I recommend picking up a copy of GQ. While mostly fashion oriented, there's usually at least one pretty-good editorial shoot of some celeb. I've also heard that Wired is a magazine with good photos too, and I remember seeing a shoot with Brad Pitt that I really enjoyed. Paragon8 posted:~links~ Might want to add a NWS for homotography, there's a pretty healthy collection of asses and pubes. RangerScum fucked around with this message at 14:39 on Aug 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:37
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:You need to figure out body language. If you are just relying on what you like to see a woman do, even if that gives you easy quick results, you'll still be stunted as a photographer. Know what kind of body posture speaks different things about people, go to the mall and do life drawing (don't worry if it's poo poo) and pay attention to what makes a person look upbeat, or down-trodden, or what makes a member of the military easy to spot even when sitting (straight back, shoulders up). If you know what body posture says, you can get men or women to pose in a way that works with your shoot idea. Basic acting literature on character development will often cover this too, I spent several years in theatre before I moved to film (and behind the camera) and I still find myself watching people move. Personally I find my biggest issue is not not knowing what people do when X but rather then communicating that to someone without awkwardly describing how each part of them should be held. It's one reason I sometimes prefer shooting actors if I want something artistic, because you can say "feel X" and you can just see their entire body transform. EDIT: A good directing technique, for actors at least, is to give a situation for the person to imagine them-self in, you don't have to get them to act it out in full or what-have-you just say "on the way here you ran over a beautiful chocolate Labrador" and watch them curl up into a ball. XTimmy fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Aug 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:39
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:What kind of shots are you looking to take? Is this going to be health/fitness, fashion, adventure, general living, etc. ? Haha whoops, I forget what's work safe for me isn't for others. Yeah, Esquire and GQ put out some great editorials. Especially in their style sections.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:46
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:How does that have anything to do with what I said and what the poster asked? I have to agree with PIMM, the way you said that makes it sound like the straight male point of view is more interesting because you're think there's "enough gay photographers shooting men" despite the fact that the vast majority of ALL photographs (especially commercial work) are shot by straight men. Also, I think the point is kind of stupid. Women photographers don't have trouble shooting women, and yet a lot of male photographers are extremely uncomfortable with shooting guys... why? It makes me wonder how they're dealing with their female models, because if you're having trouble shooting one gender, chances are you're not doing well with the other too. Part of this is because our media is absolutely saturated with dead looking "sexy" girls so if there's no connection with a women in a photograph, as long as she's "sexy," it's still a good photograph. Thoughts aside, I'd suggest that the best way to learn this stuff if you don't know it intuitively is to look into traditional art/theatre/etc to inform yourself, and also to learn how to make people comfortable. You should be able to meet someone and make them laugh after 5 minutes. There's a huge difference you can feel when the model feels comfortable that will allow you to draw out better poses, better expressions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:46
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:How does that have anything to do with what I said and what the poster asked? What nonanone said, plus what you said implies that all gay men will shoot the same way, as if their orientation will ensure one mode of thinking, as apposed to them being fully formed people with 100% agency and a plethora of styles and choices. (cause you know, women and gay men are people too). It sounds like you're projecting, that you shoot all women a certain way based on what you find attractive (rather than what the shot requires, with full knowledge of anatomy, body language, and visual styles) so gay men must do the same, but with a different gender target of their affection. Sure there are really bad gay photographers that just want to shoot abs ( abs!   ) and butts, but they're no different from the straight creepers that use photography as a way to get young girls to act out their fantasies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:58
|
|
|
I was more trying to point out that bringing a gay man for his fantabulous point of view wasn't necessary. but yeah, what I said was clearly the most offensive response. To further expound on this my flippant response was directed more at the attitude one poster had about making a gay friend or bringing a gay person to a shoot and the original poster thinking it was an interesting idea. My post was aimed to direct away from that because that perspective has been done and is common and it's much stronger for him to find what he wanted to shoot about men himself rather than taking up a whole new perspective. Not that all gay photographers are rutty and gently caress their models. Paragon8 fucked around with this message at 15:14 on Aug 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 15:06
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:I was more trying to point out that bringing a gay man for his fantabulous point of view wasn't necessary. I read the OP as bringing a gay guy as the subject because they would know better how to pose (also a stereotype). Sure their point as you understand it is crass, but your objection didn't point to that, it just sounded like you were implying that gay men can't bring anything unique to the table as a photographer so donīt bother.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 15:36
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:I read the OP as bringing a gay guy as the subject because they would know better how to pose (also a stereotype). Sure their point as you understand it is crass, but your objection didn't point to that, it just sounded like you were implying that gay men can't bring anything unique to the table as a photographer so donīt bother. Nope, I meant that he shouldn't try and borrow someone else's perspective be it gay or female but try to develop his own. He isn't adding anything unique by trying to add a gay perspective to his own work. Gay photographers and female photographers produce great work. So do straight photographers but yeah it is much more limited in fields like fashion which can be more overtly sexual than other genres of photography. I think sexuality and gender are part of a photographer's perspective in portraiture and inform their work but that doesn't necessarily mean you want to gently caress the model regardless of your or the model's gender. I'd love some project to have photographers of varying sexualities and genders shoot the same male and female models to see what came out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 15:45
|
|
|
Speaking of me not wanting to sleep with my models (be they male or female)   There's more on flickr, but I liked these best.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2011 03:13
|
|
|
I'm shooting a fashion students garments this week and want submit to a UK fashion mag. Have you guys any idea who might be a good idea to pitch to for the level of work I'm producing (have a look here https://www.chrisbutchart.co.uk) I'm going to be shooting around the Barbican in London, with an MUA and lights so it should look pretty reasonable. The lighting is going to be dramatic and I'm going to try and make the most of the architecture in the area. The garment is a unisex combo of cape and harem pants with some shiny vests.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 17:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:53 |
|
|
I've been out the last few weekends on shoots. Got back in the lab last night and made these. Amanda by McMadCow, on Flickr  Jami by McMadCow, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2011 16:56
|
|