|
squidflakes posted:Adding a grayscale layer over top but working on an adjustment layer is both non-destructive and helps you get to a medium tone easier. This is the method I like the best and makes the most sense to me.
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2010 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 05:11 |
|
|
A Family! The baby became sleepy real quick, so thats why he looks kinda ... asleep. He's 3 months old.   
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2010 05:09
|
|
|
rockcity posted:I've read most of this thread as it's come along and I don't recall reading about this, but has anyone done any maternity shoots? A friend of mine has a friend that is looking to get them done and I offered to do them for her. I have some mental ideas from some maternity shots I've seen in the past, but I've never really seen a shoot set up or anything. I did a crazy 80s aerobic themed maternity shoot. http://clients.paulchinjr.com/Portraits/pregorobics/11718807_Bm5tn#826949152_o2vVC I can't remember if it was my idea first or we did it together. You've got some pretty good experience lighting already, it shouldn't be too tough for you. What kind of ideas did you have?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2010 04:58
|
|
|
My wife watches make up tutorials on youtube from time to time. The techniques allow for all kinds of shaping of a face. You can narrow the eyes, widen them, make them bigger, make noses smaller, ect. It's really crazy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2010 03:21
|
|
|
Here's some people I shot.     
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2010 16:59
|
|
|
Schofferhofer posted:I've got around four months off coming up (No exams, so go me) and I'm going to be really looking to improve my portrait skills through constant practise. Unfortunately everyone I know is either boring or camera shy and I can't find anyone of interest willing to let me shoot them. How comfortable are you in front of the camera? Getting people to sit for you takes confidence behind the lens. If I can't connect with the person, then the photos come out terrible. You say they are boring, but I think you are projecting your thoughts onto them. I have a hard time believing that you have no immediate friends or family that you can't connect with for 30 minutes to sit down and bring their personality out. When you're hanging out talk about a relevant interest, point the camera at yourself, get them to make silly faces, make it easy and relaxed. Once they know that you're not trying to snipe them, they will forget about the camera and appreciate the nice photos you begin to take. Don't hang out in pubs to start, you gotta have the personality of a pickup artist to get strangers to sit for you. And bars have difficult lighting situations. You're overlooking a lot of opportunities that you just don't realize. Don't be so down on what you have to work with, be positive and things will turn up.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2010 15:09
|
|
|
Looks kind of uncanny valley to me. It's got this lifeless quality to it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2010 18:26
|
|
|
There's really no directing you can give a baby, you just sorta hope for the best and let the kid amuse themselves. Just remember that since it's not your kid, even when he's not looking at the camera, the parents are going to love the poo poo out of it. If it's in focus they're going to love it. I had a big breakthrough on kid shots because I realized that no matter what you give them, the parents are going to love it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2010 19:17
|
|
|
psylent posted:The vignette is waaaaaay over the top on that first one and I'm not a fan of the colour tones in either one sorry guy :/ The crop on the first shot feels awkward and you've cut her feet off on the second one. Great exposure and composition, but the way her head rests on his shoulder looks uncomfortable and unnatural. The last one of two of them looking back is fantastic. And I don't understand why you cut their heads off in that middle one.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2010 22:24
|
|
|
Penpal posted:my dad was burning some fuckin' wood so I ran out really quick and took a pic It's pretty bad rear end, though I would've liked the fire a bit more to camera right. or have him centered more in front of it. His pose is great.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2010 05:49
|
|
|
DanTheFryingPan posted:These are really solid.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 06:34
|
|
|
I guess I'll add some content. I think I've been getting better but at the same time getting much worse. Better at talking to people and posing them, worse at taking correctly exposed and composed photos. Afterwards I'm able to get some referrals and follow up conversations. These are all portraits for a business magazine.  endurance network solutions by AIIAZNSK8ER, on Flickr President of an IT firm, all I had access to was a medium sized conference room.  morphix by AIIAZNSK8ER, on Flickr  morphix by AIIAZNSK8ER, on Flickr These guys make wearable tags that change color in the presence of dangerous chemicals. The big dude is the CEO. The lab was super cluttered and cramped. The experiments they were running are precisely timed, so I only had a few minutes in between to move things around. Excuses I know.  townscapes by AIIAZNSK8ER, on Flickr They own a full service landscaping company. This was in between two huge warehouses in an industrial park, where they house all the equipment.  work for dad by AIIAZNSK8ER, on Flickr She runs a company that creates W2 income for kids by doing chores for their parents so they can open retirement accounts. Really insane concept.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2010 17:58
|
|
|
Thanks guys, I swear I thought that I was parallel to the picture frame at the time. I will keep the skin tone difference in mind next time I come across it. It seems so obvious after you pointed it out. I don't know why I like the arm band photo so much. I wanted to get this science superhero kind of thing going. The nerdiness of it really appeals to me. I worked with him for a while to get that pose, at first his arm was too foreshortened. I had to keep cranking it over just enough so it wouldn't cut off his shoulder and give a sense that his arm was actually connected to his body. I work for a financial planning firm, and the concept of the magazine was started by someone who works in my office. It's goal is to create a resource and a community of small business owners. I don't get paid much by the mag, but I sell the images back to the company, and also get to network with the owners. It's all about building relationships.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2010 04:15
|
|
|
Cross_ posted:I quite like this picture. What did you do lighten the right side of her face ? 32 inch reflector, I think I used white side. The sun was in a cool position though. It was 10am, the sun was being reflected off a glass building and it made a beam of nice golden light, while she was standing in the shade of an adjacent building. It was like the light was sneaking through an alleyway. I had her stand in it and then filled with reflector.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 17:32
|
|
|
drat, those are some famous people. I really like the concept of including the color markers and showing all the lighting equipment, but there's too many where you are right. The over processing kills it. Looking at his main site, there are some really neat images. I think he's just taken it too far for a few of them, although he may be trying to make a point. Brad Trent posted:A number of years ago it occured to me that just about 99% of what I did was a fake. For a guy who began his career shooting photo essays for Life and Time, my work had become, by its very nature, the type of thing that requires a large amount of preparation and styling and lighting and therefore... it ain't real!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2010 07:08
|
|
|
I'm having trouble figuring out the no smile portrait. Sometimes getting a smile turns into a cheesy or poo poo eating grin. Part of it is getting the subject to relax, but also getting them to express some kind of emotion other than boredom. What sort of direction have you guys had success with? I deal with business owners, so I tell them to think about how they feel when they land a new contract/client or their latest shipment gets out the door. Or when they hear positive feedback from a happy customer. It tends to help, but I look at other business portraits and there's a sense of power and confidence that comes from the 'no smile' look.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2010 20:20
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Wait. Are you saying that time is an important factor in their ease and expression?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2010 21:58
|
|
|
flyable posted:Just curious to see if you guys think there's anything I can focus on improving, especially composition-wise. Look at a bunch of family photos other photogs do. I just Google family portraits, and copy the posings you like. I'm not crazy about the crab crouching mom is doing. The overexposed backgrounds are going to happen, look for shady spots, it makes things much easier on you. Also pay close attention to the time you go out. Sunrise and sunset are ideal, but with little kids, you probably won't get anywhere near those times. For gear I like a 17-50 f/2.8 because its hell to switch lenses with small kids running around. You've done a good job keeping all the limbs in frame and keeping the horizon straight. Just leave room on the long sides an 8x10 crop.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2010 17:03
|
|
|
It's a balancing act between that spotlight look and lighting the scene. If its a large scene with lots of space, then you should light it. In the second photo, a bit more ambient would fill out the photo and you would still get that spotlight look. It makes a difference when you look at a photo and theres enough ambient to give you a sense of the environment. Lets look at this Joe McNally Photo.  Here he's got a spotlight look, but theres a splash of light on the wall and on the truck to define the space. It just creates a more interesting photo overall. And doesn't detract from the subject. You could have gotten closer and filled the frame more with him, and then since you're not so focused on showing the environment, the spot light treatment might look more appropriate.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2010 17:50
|
|
|
IsaacNewton posted:I don't mean to interject, you surely have a lot more reason to say what you do than I understand. Blurry bucket dude doesn't bother me too much, but you're right about the crooked horizon. I think his expression is neutral, but not too bored, I interpret it as more tired and exhausted. It's not the greatest example, it was just the first one that came to mind to try and illustrate my point about ambient light filling a space. I agree that in order to get closer, the boxer would have to change his pose. My point is that the spotlight effect lends itself more when you fill the frame. Either go wide and light the space or go in close and don't.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2010 18:19
|
|
|
If you find a group let me know. I've started by asking coworkers and friends. Develop an idea by researching a setting and time of day, bring that idea to them and get them to agree. Then it's all about making them comfortable sitting in front of you. I would start easy by going outside to a park at sunset and get your subjects in the shade.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2010 21:01
|
|
|
I listened to this philosophical break down of portraiture. http://philosophybites.com/2010/09/cynthia-freeland-on-portraits.html It's really interesting because she says that portraits require some effort on the part of the sitter to reveal some nature of themselves to the artist. I think it's a pretty good start when considering a portrait vs a scene with people in it. To me a truly interesting portrait would reveal something about that person. Twenties brings up good points about the difficulty of trying to categorize work with technical criteria.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2010 02:45
|
|
|
Cute kid and these are good shots, however the ambient could have been kicked up. He blends into the darkness a bit too much.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2010 23:02
|
|
|
I really like doing family portraits. I went by their house the week before to plan out where and what they wanted to shoot. The book they're reading is the boys favorite story book right now. Then we moved into their playroom, and finally Mom wanted photos of the baby girl in the crib which was handmade by Grandpa. I had them move it out of the nursery to a front room with big rear end windows.    
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2010 17:57
|
|
|
At some level, you have to value your time, delegate weaknesses and play your strengths to grow your business. You can delegate post, scheduling, lighting, props, ect. To me the one thing you can't delegate is how you get the work in the first place and working with the subject to make the shot. His time is probably better spent building relationships and getting the next client. There's nothing wrong with a team effort either. All businesses have a chief rainmaker who gets the contracts then has multiple levels of support. I see it as natural way to take things to the next level. You can only do so much by yourself. In business, you do what you must to succeed and grow. On the other hand, I would not be comfortable filling an art gallery with images that I farmed out a majority of post processing as my own.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2011 10:43
|
|
|
akulol posted:These are with natural light (I'm a poor college student) and little to no post-processing. Critiques pleeease, but don't kill me! =) Natural light is always the best light, no need for excuses there. They are both nice portraits. Some might see a problem with her fingers cut off on the first one, but you've framed her nicely with the tree branches. Her expression seems like of sleepy or bored. I'd say you're off to a good start.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:Why do her finger tips matter at all to the photo? People seem to be focusing so much on things getting cut out lately when for 90% of the photos the extremeties add nothing to the photo at all. If he had taken the same photo with the fingers in, it would look better. Completing the visual information always looks just a bit better. I don't think it ruins the photo and the composition is still very interesting. IsaacNewton posted:The only thing bugging me about #1 is the fact that the hand is seemingly coming out of nowhere, I don't mind the tips being cut off as much. It's like she's a mutant in Futurama and have a hand growing out of her forehead. I think the pose looks fairly natural to me, it didn't second guess where the hand was coming from and it's not foreshortened into a weird proportion relative to her body.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2011 18:42
|
|
|
Man_alive posted:I think you went a little too wide with this one, and there's a tree growing from her head.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2011 04:33
|
|
|
Low wide angle will make legs look longer, but in this case it would've made beer hips even wider and possibly lost her neck if she was looking down. Using a longer focal length would've been better.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 03:29
|
|
|
That is an intense stare, like someone kidnapped your puppy.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 06:41
|
|
|
I think the image links are broken.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2011 14:01
|
|
|
If you were able to pose him, I would not have had the microphone in the shot. It would have been cleaner and still had the same message.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 20:03
|
|
|
A crit I get all the time and hard for me to remember is to make sure that the persons head is not being intersected by lines or shapes. Give their head some clear space to be in. The bottom one has part of the roof sticking out of her head. I've ruined so many shots that would be really strong otherwise. You could also start messing around with off camera lighting, I've used cls outside without any problems. I started by using the base plate for the sb-600 screwed into a cheap $10 tripod, it's not as flexible as a real light stand, but the price was right. The single hardest part of portraits is just posing and making people comfortable, be ready with things to say and ways to steer the conversation.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2011 16:40
|
|
|
Niagalack posted:I tried to do the DOF thing but i think i failed miserably. Can you explain this further, I don't really understand this statement. Did you try to get less depth of field, but missed focus? Do you not like having so much depth of field and want more bokeh?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2011 21:59
|
|
|
Niagalack posted:This! English isn't my native language, i sometime have trouble expressing myself. To get those blurry backgrounds, it's easier with a lens that has a larger maximum aperture. Something like a 50mm f/1.8 can be had for around $100. Get one take your kid outside, be amazed, and then report back to us. Oh yea, that reminds me, all these photos are inside with a pop up flash, so it's good considering. Really gorgeous kid photos are outside playing in the sunshine. Sunlight is cheap, plentiful, and good for you. Here's some portraits I'm really happy with, so I need some crit to tear me down again.      
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2011 05:16
|
|
|
Thanks everybody, it's all really useful feedback. I've got to start switching up my poses and getting more creative with it in general.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 06:08
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:I'm on the fence about this one, but so far it's pretty well received on Flickr. I think I'd like it if she were turned toward the camera a bit more or away a bit more. I think I'd either like a full profile where we don't see the far eye, or more of the far cheek. AIIAZNSK8ER fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Feb 10, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2011 23:38
|
|
|
psylent posted:This looks pretty solid except her skin tone looks a little too grey, I think it might be just a tad underexposed. Gazmachine posted:I like the one with her eyes open a lot more.   
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2011 07:55
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:My favorite from a shoot with my best friend today: I think it's the background that's throwing people off. If this were on a while seamless and she filled the frame, it wouldn't be so bad. Also, ditch the hair band on her arm. If it were a piece of jewelry it would look better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 05:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 05:11 |
|
|
HPL posted:It's come to the point where I can look at photos without seeing the user name and pick out AIIAZNSK8ER's photos. In other words, congrats on finding a style. Thanks? I didn't post 'pale chick in the woods', I hope you didn't think that was mine. Now if you see 'dude in suit', that's probably mine. Gazmachine posted:I think people are confusing Skater's pics with Atomic's pics. Good god, I hope not. Reichstag posted:'Bland' is not a style. Truth
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 14:28
|
|