|
did a bunch of portrait shots of my sister. I used a light box I created which was too her left, and a snooted flash at 1/16th behind her for the hair light. It's easy to work with someone when you're related and already have a decent relationship    
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2009 21:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
I find that, too. I've added some girls on facebook that I kind of know, and I'm going to contact them and ask if they want to do any shoots. I don't think they'll say no, because i'm a pretty aloof and easy-to-get-along with funny kind of guy. Usually it's kind of like hanging out but i'll ask them to stop every now and then, pose, and I'll snap or quickly set up some lights. I've done it a couple of times before, barely knowing the subject, but building the rapport was the first thing I did. I feel like i'm getting better at it, and sometimes I'll tell an extremely lame pun (oh god ironic puns, oh yeah) and junk and I get my smile, or say something like "Look into the camera" and not take a picture, and then tell them I just wanted to make them feel awkward. That one gets a laugh, too. PORTRAITS
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2009 03:18
|
|
|
 jumped inside of a giant christmas tree type decoration thing for this shot. 50 1.4 wide open, focused on the eyes. Disappointed with the lack of chin/neck separation (they kind of blend a bit) but I'm really pleased with it, besides the splurge splurge bokeh bokeh bokeh. All available light, lately I have been on a tangent and have stopped using my flash in night shots.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2009 07:50
|
|
|
Yeah I saw that last night and was all fuuuuuuck and was too tired to fix it... I think I'll just take the blur brush in ps and go over it? I wouldn't know how to fix it besides undoing my edits which, well, I don't want. And I say "besides" the bokeh because it's just.. I don't know, I feel like too many people put too much emphasis on it, you know? Like for some people it's just fuckin' bokeh bokeh bokeh and that's boring after a while.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2009 15:25
|
|
|
 i found the lighting right here to be great, so I just exposed the shot for her at -1 and brightened her up in post to retain the background. woooo
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2010 01:44
|
|
|
Yeah I noticed that when I viewed it large. I am going to burn her face and dodge the other half, because it kind of looks like she's got two face going on. Thanks guys
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2010 16:17
|
|
|
Yeah, I know what you're saying. I usually bring a strobe, but this woman had a half hour free between teaching at MUN (University here in St. John's... yeah, she's a prof, too) and a hockey game. This was kind of spur of the moment. I don't remember if I dodged her entire body, I don't think I did... I know I dodged her face, but it was set to highlights (or mids) and I forgot to set it to shadows and do the other side. When I'm at my own machine, I'm going to redo it and re-upload it. Thanks for all of the critiques and stuff!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2010 18:37
|
|
|
 took a picture of an actor friend of mine. Flash fired in reflecting umbrella at 1/16th power. It's so much easier taking pictures of actors, they actually listen to what you say and everything!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2010 17:09
|
|
|
Thanks a bunch, dude! I know a bunch of people have different ways of dealing with eyes, and some of them are hosed. Like making them look like dolls hosed. I just dodge, saturate, and sharpen as much as necessary. Even with this one I thought I had kind of went a little overboard, but he's an actor, he needs people to instantly look at this and get snared by the drat eyes like a trap
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2010 18:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2010 03:36
|
|
|
Whitezombi posted:this would be an excellent triptych to hang in a home if the last picture was vertical as well. They're really good mono photos.  portrait of my friend. Forgot my umbrella so my flash was bare. It was about ten feet to my right, about eight feet up, angled downward. I decided to use it because there was cloud cover and no really good midday sunlight to use, and I wanted isolation as opposed to even lighting. I helped this along with some dodging/burning.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2010 18:59
|
|
|
I actually did a lot of dodging around the (camera) right of his head, and his shoulders, to insert a ~~~fake~~~ contour highlight. It didn't do much, especially around his shoulders but it was a ton darker. I also dodged the highlights of the gown, and burned the shadows. When I was doing this, I didn't just slather the dodge/burn on... I really went and kind of painted shadow definition in there. I wanted it to look really smooth, like a black car.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2010 22:30
|
|
|
It was shot at 1.8 dude! And I don't know about using a rim light. I usually use only one strobe for portraits like this in a natural setting with natural light, because then it seems too artificial if you know what I mean. I haven't come across many photographers who can keep a natural looking photo while still using 2+ strobes. I have another portrait that I'll be posting in an hour, or tomorrow morning and thanks for liking it dude!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2010 02:31
|
|
|
Yeah, I get what you're saying. I read your lighting blog a bunch, too! I usually click on it every couple of days but you don't update very often. I think one of the reasons why I feel that way is because I'm very saturated with photographers my age who are doing the "million strobes" thing to make a photo more dynamic, when you can achieve dynamism other ways. I'm thinking of band photos, portraits, that sort of thing... sometimes with HDR or high-pass cranked way up. With rim lights so hot it's like there are three suns pointed at the person, whether or not they're in a car park, in a forest, or any other setting. I didn't really say that "only one light looks good", but I should clarify my ignorant opinion a bit: I haven't seen many photos that use more than one flash in a forest setting while maintaining a naturalistic look. Not that there aren't any good ones, I just haven't seen many. Any links and lighting tutorials would be awesome. I have to say that Joey L's portraits of indigenous peoples were not really my style. I recognize that the lighting was good, but I just didn't prefer it. And LastMan: I sharpened it quite a bit in LR because I think I did miss the focus by a hair. You can see the moss in front of him just slightly is sharp as hell, but it very narrowly drops off. I didn't bump the clarity TOO much, LR says it's +15. I also didn't high pass it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2010 17:30
|
|
|
Yeah, the strobist blog is one that I know I should make daily checkups on but never do. Also that sucks about the fashion show, I haven't been to one (locally) that was either too dark, or lit horribly (giant deep yellow and red lights). Seems like if you frame it tighter you can get a 'swarm of adoring people' type of photo. I would bump the exposure and cut the fat on the left.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2010 13:52
|
|
|
A portrait of my sister, because she left for another city that day.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2010 19:53
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:haha, I just noticed that. It's hanging on a branch! e: Forgot my camera bag and it had to go SOMEWHERE, why not, you know, in the frame? forest spirit fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Oct 6, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2010 21:55
|
|
|
Tshirt Ninja posted:This is cool. Is all the light natural? How much post did you do? It almost feels like multiple exposures. It's all natural light, yes, but I did do a lot of dodging/burning. For example, the moss: I dodged the highlights to blow them way out and burned any slight shadow to make them really dark, because I just loving love deep contrasts. I dodged my sister, but really only a tiny bit in the face, because that's what I had originally exposed for. I did have her move forward from her initial spot a couple of feet behind her, because I wanted stronger highlights outlining her. Then I just played with curves until I got the look I wanted.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2010 15:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2010 20:56
|
|
|
Gazmachine posted:Crap, yeah. Will fix that. Thanks. I've got to say, too, I don't really like the green colour of her top. With the deep red, they don't really... mesh. But that's something you can easily change in PS.  photo from like a month ago I've gotten around to editing
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2010 18:52
|
|
|
my dad was burning some fuckin' wood so I ran out really quick and took a pic
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2010 23:24
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Actually now looking at the full size, it looks like it's just super aggressive sharpening applied to the entire image. Mask that poo poo. And potentially burn the sky like Reichstag suggested. so I know basically next to nothing about masking. I have done it very few times, probably very shoddily, going through tutorials AS I did it. Any good places to start? If you don't know off hand, just say so and I will google around. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2010 03:56
|
|
|
I've been using the high-pass filter for a while now, it makes hair and other fine textures (wet streets) really pop. It's just masking that I'm poo poo at. I want to become a masking wizard. Help me, someone.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2010 06:35
|
|
|
haha holy poo poo, I'm learning photoshop! I just used masking legitimately for the first time. Like using different gradients to let poo poo seep through. How I got by without this so far is weird. I guess that's what you get when you teach yourself everything
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
did this for the ladyfriend a little while ago:
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2011 23:40
|
|
|
 quick portrait I took of a friend with some glasses my roommate owned
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2011 06:01
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:
I like this one but I think the shadows are a little cool, i'd go into the curves for the blue channel and bring a little bit to the orange. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
I'm not a fan of how the vignette has thicker line weight on the top than the sides. Also for these styles of vignettes that don't have much of a gradient I like seeing opaque white/black vignettes. Other than than it's a good portrait and much better without the watermark
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:It's been a while since I last got slammed for my terrible lighting choices, so here's the next set of experiments. This time, high-key lighting. I would heal over the wrinkles in the backdrop
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2018 09:18
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:I don't mind the wide/flat thing going on, but that highlight on her left nose/frame right kills it for me. It doesn't flow with the framing. Yeah HH, I would fill that in with black and see how it looks, it would probably be better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2018 06:57
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:
excellent natural framing as well, she's being framed inside of both of the bright windows and she's centered on the wall. very good naturalistic portrait
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2023 13:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
Ziggy Smalls posted:
I would leave as is, cutting off hands and feet for framing might be taboo but the photo here works so well with your initial framing, the space, with the sun hitting the leaves and the expression of your grandfather are so incredibly warming, I wouldn't lose anything. forest spirit fucked around with this message at 04:15 on Jun 11, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2023 04:03
|
|
