|
IsaacNewton posted:I don't know why, but he's pinkish in the color version and she has normal-ish tones. I still like the color version better, I'll see if I can try some editing once I get back from work  Edit: Ouch, new page! Well here are 2 shots I discarded from the shoot with Stephanie but that she ended up liking a lot... so I'll add them here:  IMG_0471 by avoyer, on Flickr  IMG_0519 by avoyer, on Flickr
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2011 15:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:35 |
|
|
xenilk posted:I still like the color version better, I'll see if I can try some editing once I get back from work Uh? That's super cool. You can have the raw file if you want! I'd love to learn new techniques.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2011 15:40
|
|
|
I did a shoot for a friend's band: Highly original concept:  
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 00:57
|
|
|
psylent posted:I did a shoot for a friend's band: gotta watch the focus when you have them standing at different distances from the camera
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 01:24
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:gotta watch the focus when you have them standing at different distances from the camera
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 01:34
|
|
|
psylent posted:That was on purpose, we'll trying to make the frontman stand out a bit more in that case you should try to have everyone more consistently out of focus. The issue for me is that they're in different levels of focus - the bearded guy is clearly out of focus but the other two are sort of half in and out. With the lighting and placement the frontman is going to stand out more anyway Paragon8 fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Oct 7, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 01:59
|
|
|
psylent posted:That was on purpose, we'll trying to make the frontman stand out a bit more It doesn't look like it was done on purpose unfortunately. If you want to bring more attention, I'd do it with lighting. He's already in front, so there's that part already established, he just needs a little more push, and I think lighting, rather than focus would do it. Backlight's a fair bit too strong I think. It's making the lighting pretty inconsistent for the two guys on the edges, totally blowing out a side of their face, rather than working as a hairlight like the other two guys.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 02:04
|
|
|
Good points. I was just using a flash on a stand behind them for the back light. I probably should have used an umbrella or something to spread the light a bit more. Here's another one from the same session (this is straight out of camera, I'm aware of the flash stand): 
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 02:33
|
|
|
Was going to message you on flickr but it went kaput on me, so I'll ask here. How do you edit your photos to get either effects? I know one is split toning, but what kind of colours? I'm a bit new to this kind of editing so mercy me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 08:39
|
|
|
You can tell the colors by just looking at the highlights and the shadows.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 09:24
|
|
|
Just had my first photoshoot with babies... Thankfully it was just for a friend, but how do you guys do it?? It sucked because all day it was perfectly overcast, but warm, and then as soon as we left the house the sun came out. I have like 100 pictures of them with their backs to the camera, maybe 2 of them actually looking at the camera, and maybe 1 keeper of them together. They are 18 month old twins, and curious about everything, so they never sat still, and then they got cranky and we had to stop. I am not happy at all with what I have. Bah.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 01:55
|
|
|
I didn't get the weather I wanted today, but I've got a start on pulling off a shot with a rainstorm + cold weather. It feels great to 1) Have the gear to pull off shoots that I imagine 2) Know how to use to to work toward the results I want
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 02:17
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:Just had my first photoshoot with babies... Thanks for making me stress about my upcoming shoot with a 1 year old! ha ha
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 03:48
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:Just had my first photoshoot with babies... How old, because babies are easy money. Are you talking about toddlers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 04:13
|
|
|
Headshot session:   I'm not gonna know what to do with myself when I get someone in front of the camera who isn't really good looking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 04:22
|
|
|
Guy works a pose like a giraffe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 04:32
|
|
|
xenilk posted:Thanks for making me stress about my upcoming shoot with a 1 year old! ha ha Ah, you make everything look easy, so I'm sure you'll be fine! After I went through them and started editing, I'm actually not as unhappy with them as I originally was. I think the trick may be to throw out any expectations you have in terms of 'oh, this pose would be great!' and just capture them as they are. AIIAZNSK8ER posted:How old, because babies are easy money. Are you talking about toddlers? I suppose they would be classified as toddlers? They're somewhere around 16 or 18 months old, so whatever that is...anything less than 4 I just call babies :P They were definitely active on their feet, but not old enough to talk much other than mama and dada. Super cute.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 04:59
|
|
|
I hate shooting babies, what you need is their parents right behind you dancing around making idiots of themselves so that the kid looks vaguely in your direction and smiles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 05:04
|
|
|
xenilk posted:Thanks for making me stress about my upcoming shoot with a 1 year old! ha ha What I did for my nephew (who I've shot from birth up until now as a 2.5 yr old) is either calling his name, or working with him - I go where he goes, follow him around and basically get great shots of him doing what babies do best, which is wander around. Now if you're talking about a staged shoot in front of a picked out place, then just be prepared to take 100's of shots hoping a few are keepers. PS. the mothers of babies will like all kinds of photos, even ones that look a bit off to a photographer's eyes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 05:08
|
|
|
psylent posted:I hate shooting babies, what you need is their parents right behind you dancing around making idiots of themselves so that the kid looks vaguely in your direction and smiles. Yeah, that was a big lesson I learned. The parents were standing off to the side in most of them, so the kids are looking out of frame instead of in my direction most of the time. I will definitely recommend they bring a toy or something and stand behind me next time. Also I ended up using my 17-50mm the entire time, which I never do...I seem to switch which lens I prefer for portraits everytime I do a session. I felt like the 50mm might be too constrained if I'm shooting 2 toddlers who never sit still, and the 70-200 I'd have to be way out in the bush to use, and again, with 2 toddlers in different directions, I felt I wouldn't be able to capture what I wanted. But in this situation, which lens would you guys have reached for, and why?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 05:11
|
|
|
Babies! As always, any advice is greatly appreciated! This is my first non-close friend shoot, and they didn't pay me, but they gave me a gift card so I'm feeling some pressure on this one.  Goodreau Twins-0722 by bernsai, on Flickr  Goodreau Twins-0683 by bernsai, on Flickr  Goodreau Twins-0628 by bernsai, on Flickr  Goodreau Twins-0573 by bernsai, on Flickr  Goodreau Twins-0564 by bernsai, on Flickr  Goodreau Twins-0535 by bernsai, on Flickr His expression in this one is awesome...hehe  Goodreau Twins-0537 by bernsai, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 17:40
|
|
|
Santa is strapped posted:PS. the mothers of babies will like all kinds of photos, even ones that look a bit off to a photographer's eyes. This is very important to remember. Pictures of kids sells like hot cake. Besides, parents know they are hard to photography. (they tried!) So if you can manage 3-4 awesome shots out of the session they will be amazed. Strange noise, clown nose, clown hair, bright colors, noisy stuff, etc all help to get the kid attention, but don't go taking your time to compose the shot because that attention wont last long at all. Don't go in expecting perfect shots though, probably you wont make any real keeper for you, but they will be appreciated by the parents anyway. Edit: Wow, these shots are perfect, they represents the baby perfectly like their character and poo poo. Parents will dig it. You did it for free? gently caress that, don't do it for free anymore. Edit2: Now if you think babies are hard, try animals.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 17:40
|
|
|
You did a great job CarrotFlowers. The second does make it look like you interrupted the little dude taking a piss though
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 17:45
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:You did a great job CarrotFlowers. Haha, I didn't notice that! She's the girl though, so hopefully it won't look that way to the parents :P
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:Babies! Oh my god, this is adorable! A shot from today's shoot:  IMG_1182 by avoyer, on Flickr xenilk fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Oct 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 18:59
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers: You are very modest. Pictures like that were the last thing I was expecting when you originally posted about them. They're great. Feel free to be confident about them!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 22:40
|
|
|
Lamb of Gun posted:CarrotFlowers: You are very modest. Pictures like that were the last thing I was expecting when you originally posted about them. They're great. Feel free to be confident about them! Thanks, man! I should have said something with my post, but I actually am happy with how they turned out. I wrote my original post right after we got back, and I think the disappointment of not getting my "ideal" shots combined with my exposure being all over the place, I wasn't sure if I was going to get any keepers. In the end, I do think it was pretty successful. I definitely learned two things: 1. Throw most of my posed ideas out the window next time, and 2. Spot metering combined with back button focus and black shirts definitely needs more practice from me. I kept focusing on the eyes, recomposing, then when I pressed the shutter, it locked exposure on the center point which was usually located on their shirts, and since I was in AV, a good chunk of my photos were blown out. Thank God for RAW.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 00:11
|
|
|
Any tips/resources for posing in a Kimono? It's a proper traditional one so the model will be quite constricted movement-wise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 02:55
|
|
|
xenilk posted:Oh my god, this is adorable! Your flickr URL is a complete lie, the only thing I'd do is maybe take some red from the darks, as it's looking slightly purple, but it is only slight.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 03:30
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:Your flickr URL is a complete lie, the only thing I'd do is maybe take some red from the darks, as it's looking slightly purple, but it is only slight. That's a fair point, I think I'll have to slightly work on the eye as well, the corner of the eye is too red for my taste also. As for my flickr URL it was inspired from a discussion I had with a photography group in my region. I see a lot of professional photographers that really take it personal when you call yourself a photographer (which is really silly in my book because a photographer is just someone who takes pictures). So I decided that I wouldn't call myself a photographer... It's silly when you think about it but I feel like it's just a nudge at those professional photographer who takes things way too seriously. They should let their work speak for itself instead of being mad at insignificant little things like that. Anyways, sorry for the rant and thanks for the compliment, it's very kind Santa is strapped posted:What I did for my nephew (who I've shot from birth up until now as a 2.5 yr old) is either calling his name, or working with him - I go where he goes, follow him around and basically get great shots of him doing what babies do best, which is wander around. Now if you're talking about a staged shoot in front of a picked out place, then just be prepared to take 100's of shots hoping a few are keepers. I'm sorry I didn't reply to this. It's very good advice, I'll use that knowledge for sure and just go with the flow ... and well pray that he's having a great day!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 04:09
|
|
|
xenilk posted:
Reminds me of: http://www.threequestionmarks.com/blog/2007/06/im-not-photographer.html edit: NSFW, boobs on the page. Hot Cops fucked around with this message at 05:01 on Oct 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 04:58
|
|
|
xenilk posted:
I didn't call myself a photographer until I'd been shooting for about four years, I can understand getting defensive about the title because people work for years to become good at what they do and seeing a smug 16 year old take dutch-angled, under exposed poo poo-shots of their friends and then take a title that groups themselves in with people doing real hard work can be a bit grating. It reminds me of the time a photographer friend of mine came and said he wanted to move into cinematography and it was all I could do to not say: "Get a qualification, work as a 2nd Assist Camera for five years then a 1st Assist Camera for ten, gaffer some poo poo, learn how to storyboard, floor plan and shot list, learn to work with constant lights, balance three-phase electricity, and above all else learn to relinquish creative control to a man who doesn't know the half of what you know but has a VISION and you can move into cinematography". I obviously didn't because ultimately, if you're the head of the Camera dept on a shoot, you're the cinematographer, even if that crew is only two people wide.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 06:49
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:His expression in this one is awesome...hehe The good thing about photographing kids is that the parents are so besotted with their own children, so all you have do is get a nicely exposed shot that is in focus with a shallow depth of field and they'll be extremely happy. If you can get the kid into a non-awkward pose and manage a nice composition as well then you're more than golden. I don't really enjoy shooting kids, so I really only do close friends' kids. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 13:19
|
|
|
Heh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2011 05:02
|
|
|
 Drinkwater, Eatphone by ethics_gradient, on Flickr I kinda wish I'd had him pose seriously, because I think the background elements for this shot work pretty well. Have to remember to bring my good camera with me next time we're at that restaurant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 01:39
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:
I like it, it's fun and the background really works with his casual appearance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 03:06
|
|
|
Shot this over the weekend. Slightly  for sheer fabric. Kammi by McMadCow, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 08:02
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:Shot this over the weekend. Slightly Firstly, you're one of the reasons I want to start shooting film. Secondly I was planning a shoot with flowing fabrics, you plagiarising gently caress! Third the negative space to the left is perhaps a little large. What's your process for getting such nice darks in your images?
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 08:19
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:Firstly, you're one of the reasons I want to start shooting film. 1: Aww shucks, thanks! 2: Hi, welcome to last weekend. Try to keep up.  3: I agree. I decided to stick with it because it was the best example of the model and the fabric out of that series of attempts. As far as my blacks go, I use split filter printing. It's real easy to dial in your blacks only when doing your exposure with a #5 filter. If you make sure things like deep shadows are maximum black, you get that dramatic look and everything else falls in when you expose with your 0/00 filter for the whites.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 08:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:35 |
|
|
Jumping on the bandwagon to say Carrotflowers, those pics are already twice as good as those identikit lovely Venture Studio images of babies stood up holding some fake steps, because you've got bags of their character coming through in those images - they're portraits which are interesting and show off their character. You can and should charge for stuff like that.McMadCow posted:Shot this over the weekend. Slightly Really like this. It is a shame that the black neg. space isn't to the right instead, following the flow of the fabric, but it's nevertheless great. Plus the model is absolutely incredible. It's been an age since I posted in here, so here are some recent studio bits that I didn't hate, although I have no opinion of them now, seeing as it's been a week since I shot them. I hate that, even with a photo I like, I often end up dead to them after 2 weeks or so.     Granted these are hair and makeup reference sessions where, if it looks like I'm good for time or have a little extra, I can take a little more care over lighting and the like, but I still feel like the only real improvement over the last set I posted like this is slightly more even lighting. When I bang on a bit of post like this, I'm developing a sort of lower contrast, edge sharpened style that I quite like. Or at least sometimes I do, then I hate it. I don't know. I am crazy and have probably been doing too much photo work over the past two weeks or so. I think my frustration is that I'm not excited by the composition of any of them. Maybe I just need to get a model over and spend a couple of hours with one model which will give me some time to play with a wide combination of lighting and posing, etc, which means I probably need to do a free shoot. What do you all think, both about the shots and about that last paragraph?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 12:03
|
|
