|
rcman50166 posted:And to think I was about to open up my "idiot piss garbage for a clown at the circus" folder and pick one. I believe that this just called "pictures" now in Win 8.1
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 20:04 |
|
|
rcman50166 posted:And to think I was about to open up my "idiot piss garbage for a clown at the circus" folder and pick one. I wish you the absolute best of luck and look forward to seeing what you produce. And if it's awesome I will literally give you $35 USD towards the purchase of ReMask.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 11:52
|
|
|
Whelp, I am also in the "slightly out of focus LF portraits" club. I got way too ambitious with my aperture for shooting a nonmodel. I am fairly happy with these two though. 20140311-005-web by 8th-samurai, on Flickr  20140311-004-web by 8th-samurai, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
The first day of the kitesurfing season started today. For us anyway. We need some hoods, the water was rather cold. Solnedgang over Skåstrup by AFBK, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
jackpot posted:The general consensus so far seems to be that I suffer from "dad posting poo poo that nobody else would want to see," but I'm trying to improve on that. Besides the "make me care" part, I'd love to hear if there are any other obvious portrait failures happening here. These are wonderful and make me want to throw my camera and lenses in the goddamned river. I've never been able to take pics of my kids this nice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
 Lensbaby headshot by voodoorootbeer, on Flickr  Lensbaby headshot by voodoorootbeer, on Flickr Don't worry, I shot normal ones with the 85 too but I thought these were kind of cool. I had to stop down to f4 to have any prayer of getting eyes in focus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Someone linked me one of these and I refused to believe it wasn't parody until they also linked me to this post. Alright, Soundmonkey. I hope this is up to your standards.  goon.jpg by rcman50166, on Flickr Bonus lighting setup.  A few notes. Yes that is me. I had to buy pretty much all of those clothes in the shot as well as the home made diffuser. All in all, I spent ~$45 to avoid, at worst, a ban. Oh, I also didn't shave for three days just to look the part. The cloth is a 54x54 white cloth that I bought at a Jo-Anne Fabrics for $8. I hemmed it then proceeded to punch tarp grommets into it to suspend with rope. The flashes are 2 Vivitar 285HVs on full power. rcman50166 fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Mar 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 02:47
|
|
MOD CHALLENGE
|
rcman50166 posted:Alright, Soundmonkey. I hope this is up to your standards. I'm... actually really impressed. I'm gonna have to simmer on this for a bit to decide if it qualifies as "bitchin". Question: did you also have to either buy or borrow the hat? It matters. What say you, Mr. Hornaday?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I'm... actually really impressed. I'm gonna have to simmer on this for a bit to decide if it qualifies as "bitchin". Question: did you also have to either buy or borrow the hat? It matters. I had to buy the stupid hat. It was $5.40 on clearance at target. I still have the tags on it. I don't plan on keeping it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:I had to buy the stupid hat. It was $5.40 on clearance at target. I still have the tags on it. I don't plan on keeping it. Ok because if you already owned that hat you were gonna get automatically disqualified from the "bitchin" bonus reward. Serioustalk you should do less photoshop fuckery and more of this poo poo, getting out and taking pictures that look cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
I try things I suck at, get yelled at here, try suggestions to get better then rinse and repeat. I guess I went a little off the deep end with those photoshops.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
I think that tree on the right needs to be cropped out, but otherwise seems cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
socks + flip flops gets a gold star from me
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
This mod challenge > fuckin Catalina wine mixer
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:03
|
|
|
Haha pretty drat good, but dont lie, you already owned that shirt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
He has clearly completed the challenge and now nobody is allowed to make fun of any of the pics of his that I quoted earlier, but if people have ideas for the challenge, Good Stuff may happen if you submit them and they're awesome.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:41
|
|
|
Stamp of approval.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 12:01
|
|
|
*puts fist in hand and bows honorably* I am really interested in what everyone else interprets "idiot piss garbage for a clown at the circus" as. deaders posted:Haha pretty drat good, but dont lie, you already owned that shirt. I was blessed with that shirt on clearance at a Spencer's Gifts for $7.50. rcman50166 fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Mar 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
.
Tricerapowerbottom fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Apr 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Tricerapowerbottom posted:Took my kids out back to catch insects and managed to get a couple shots of the boy that turned out. He ends up coming off like a potentially dangerous little poo poo in them, but that's mostly because of the crowbar we use to open logs and stumps. I can't tell if I'm channeling Shelby Lee Adams or just blowing smoke up my own rear end about these being interesting in terms of composition. Your kid's hair and jacket are really cool, but they have a tree growing out of their head in the first one and the light is harsh and odd in the second. Focus problems in both. Composition-wise I don't know what you're talking about because they're both 'face goes in middle' and that's it as far as I can tell. Both would need post-work if you were happy with the rest of the photo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
365 Nog Hogger posted:Your kid's hair and jacket are really cool, but they have a tree growing out of their head in the first one and the light is harsh and odd in the second. Focus problems in both. Composition-wise I don't know what you're talking about because they're both 'face goes in middle' and that's it as far as I can tell. Both would need post-work if you were happy with the rest of the photo. Hmm, I guess I mean "subject" instead of composition, although I really am happy with the shapes in the second one. I thought they weren't boring portraits, in other words. I appreciate the input. What sort of post work do you think I could do to improve either of them? Up the contrast in the first, lower the exposure on his face in the second?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Give your kids banjos and squeeze them into a 24mm frame.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
I haven't really shot digital properly before nor do I know anything about editing so critique is very welcome.  
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 10:46
|
|
|
widunder posted:I haven't really shot digital properly before nor do I know anything about editing so critique is very welcome. It is nice of that hand to prop up your friends face.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:It is nice of that hand to prop up your friends face. Nothing wrong with some face-hand action. I really like the light in the first one, by the way. The colors are subtle and lovely. I went up on the roof with a co-worker:  Untitled by thetzar, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Drop Database posted:Thanks for your feedback! I'm learning a lot about makeup :\ Drop Database posted:Did a photoshoot in an abandoned building back in December, only finished processing recently. What do you guys think? I know this is a few pages back, but I didn't see anyone else mention it. To me, the most distracting thing in 'serious' photography is harsh shadows from an on-axis flash (unless it's intentional, i.e. Terry Richardson). Get the flash off axis, or make it bigger with a softbox, or even figure out how to photoshop it out. Since you want to go for a darker 'gothic' look, I'd say to expose the ambient or background a stop or two under the subject light. The second criticism I have is that the archway of the door behind the subject intersects with her head, and 'Head in a Clean Spot' is one of my unbreakable rules. The third photo has this to a smaller degree, but it's paint on the background rather than trees or powerlines, so it's not as bad. With the full-lengths, if you had her take a step back and center her in the doorway I think it would add more 'structure' to make the photo more organized. And now, with apologies to Luis X...    
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
 _MG_8779.jpg by Photografaffer, on Flickr  _MG_8755.jpg by Photografaffer, on Flickr  _MG_8738.jpg by Photografaffer, on Flickr Took these for my portrait class, assignment was three portraits using different lens and lighting setups with one in color.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
Can someone recommend a good "beginner" setup for a light stand + diffuser? Basically I have my camera, a tripod and a flash. I am really interested in taking portraits, and I assume what I need next is a stand + umbrella or soft box to get the most out of my flash. Is that correct? Or is there stuff I can do with just the flash?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Can someone recommend a good "beginner" setup for a light stand + diffuser? Do you have a way of controlling your flash once it's off your camera? You'll need some sort of remote trigger (or a long cable) as well. Also, don't discount on-camera flash for portraits. If you're in a room with light-colors walls and ceiling, you can throw the light behind you and create a large illuminated surface, which can be useful for portraits. A Westcott double-fold white shoot-through umbrella is really handy to have. While umbrellas lack the light control and shape of a softbox, being able to put a big soft source of light just slightly off-axis to the lens will improve things considerably. You'll also need an umbrella adapter like this to attach the umbrella and flash to your stand. Softboxes are typically preferred for portraiture because of the window-like catchlights they create in the subject's eyes, plus the ability to more tightly control the light, so you can light up the person in front of you without lighting up the whole rest of the room. Not sure what a good beginner's softbox would be, the good ones all tend to be spendy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
A diffuser buys you variable angular size. A bare flash is a very small light source and casts sharp shadows.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
If you're just starting out, you don't need to buy anything. You can make a softbox out of some cardboard, tape and baking paper for the diffusion material. I made a ghetto version of Peter Hurley's crazy-expensive kino flo light setup, and while it's not exactly the same standard, it's pretty decent for costing almost nothing.  
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
David Pratt posted:If you're just starting out, you don't need to buy anything. You can make a softbox out of some cardboard, tape and baking paper for the diffusion material. Haha that's pretty cool! Looks like I'd at least need to buy a light stand though, right now I don't even have that. I bought one of those knockoff Canon flashes that have TTL and off camera control. So I don't think I need a remote trigger? Unless there's some benefit I'm not understanding.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
Chekans 3 16 posted:
I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between lighting setup 1 and 3. Is it that tough of rimlight in the right rear? I have a problem: I can't stop taking pictures of people.  Untitled by thetzar, on Flickr  Untitled by thetzar, on Flickr  Untitled by thetzar, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 15:58
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Can someone recommend a good "beginner" setup for a light stand + diffuser? Check out Strobist, http://strobist.blogspot.com/ It's pretty interesting and he has Lighting 101 and 102 posts you can walk through and he makes some cheap gear recommendations from time to time. The LumoPro collapsible stands and Wescott umbrellas are cheap but quality as long as you don't plan on doing too much outside on a windy day, etc. You're flash might also have an optical slave to get you started as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
I have been using 285HVs for 4 years now. Fantastic, cheap, manual flashes. I have 3 of them with 3 umbrellas and stands with wireless triggers. All in all about $300 bucks worth of lighting for a full studio. See goon.jpg. Hot lights are even cheaper, given you never want to be more than a few feet away from an outlet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:I have been using 285HVs for 4 years now. Fantastic, cheap, manual flashes. I have 3 of them with 3 umbrellas and stands with wireless triggers. All in all about $300 bucks worth of lighting for a full studio. See goon.jpg. I bought a couple LumoPro LP180s when they were on sale over Black Friday for 159 a piece. I'd recommend them as well, optical, pc and mono cable sync options, built in gel holder and thread to for your light stand to get them closer on axis to your umbrella or modifier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
thetzar posted:I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between lighting setup 1 and 3. Is it that tough of rimlight in the right rear? Background light might be spilling a bit, the 1st and 3rd one are both Rembrandt, but the black and white one the light is closer and there's no fill. Also the diffusion is placed differently. I didn't really like the results I got with other setups so they ended up similar, but hopefully different enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:Alright, Soundmonkey. I hope this is up to your standards. Yessss
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
red19fire posted:I know this is a few pages back, but I didn't see anyone else mention it. To me, the most distracting thing in 'serious' photography is harsh shadows from an on-axis flash (unless it's intentional, i.e. Terry Richardson). Get the flash off axis, or make it bigger with a softbox, or even figure out how to photoshop it out. Since you want to go for a darker 'gothic' look, I'd say to expose the ambient or background a stop or two under the subject light. First three are good but last one makes it look like she's missing an arm, no?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 20:04 |
|
|
xenilk posted:First three are good but last one makes it look like she's missing an arm, no? That + derp face.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:08
|
|
