|
Flat soled shoes are also unflattering and contribute to the short-legged look. Either get some shoes with heels or have her pose where she's extending her foot.
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2010 18:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 00:27 |
|
|
nonanone posted:The best thing you can do is have a good makeup artist (or even have some proper powder on hand) Definitely. The first time I did a shoot involving a makeup artist, it was such a difference in post-processing. Way less work if any at all on fixing skin tones, blemishes and what not.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2010 01:29
|
|
|
Gambl0r posted:These are my first portraits ever. Please feel free to critique them! The one thing that you don't need to critique is the horrible choice of background. Shooting with a brick background is okay, but what I probably would have done is moved the models further away from the wall so the wall isn't so bright. If it were darker, the models would stand out more. Moving the models further away would also help blur the background somewhat as well since it wouldn't be as close to the focal plane.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 12:50
|
|
|
He couldn't even move the model further away and shoot through a doorway or something?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 16:30
|
|
|
I guess given the space constraints, putting snoots on the flashes might help control light spill onto the background and make the models more distinct.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2010 01:33
|
|
|
That poor "H" must be under a ton of strain.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2010 23:10
|
|
|
Cross_ posted:Hand-holding at 1/30 seems daring. I can't tell if her face is blurry or out-of-focus, but something is off. Probably because it's shot at 22mm. Not super wide, but sort of wide.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2010 01:52
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:So, how do you get an actual, planned portrait out of someone like this? Booze. Either that or talk to her and tell her to relax. I have a feeling you'd get a great photo out of her if you catch her mid-laugh or something like that so maybe have a conversation with her while you shoot.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2010 14:46
|
|
|
nerdz posted:Is there such a thing as candid portraits? You've got to be quick and run with fairly generic settings so you can bring up the camera, boom, photo, then bring the camera back down. If you prefocus, you can use live view for even less noise and catch people unaware.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2010 19:46
|
|
|
The two gym owner ones are the weaker ones of the set, ironically. They aren't as flattering and seem more like off-the-cuff candids as opposed to portraits. The second, third and fourth are great and do a good job of showing personality and describing the subjects. The first is decent but I think it would be more interesting if she were in the stands as opposed to out on the field. It would bring more of the background elements into play as opposed to being a mere backdrop. Plus if she were in the stands, she wouldn't be squinting one eye from the bright sun. Despite how you feel about the execution of the third, I think it's the best of them all because it's fun, it's detailed without losing the subjects and you really get a sense that these guys are doing what they love.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2010 04:47
|
|
|
I think a fun idea for the soccer lady would be to have her in front of the stands, have her hold a soccer ball then get down on a knee and shoot upwards with a wide angle to get a sweeping view of the stands with her towering in front in kind of a grand "I own this poo poo" way.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2010 22:59
|
|
|
EXCUSES! 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2010 01:10
|
|
|
Blakles posted:But there's light all over her face? For a split second. Not long enough for the pupils to react. EDIT: I regret nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2010 16:56
|
|
|
Gazmachine posted:Anyway, I've avoided posting in one of these threads up to now, because I'm a huge coward. Please proceed to tear apart my fragile, fragile ego. It's neat but it looks underexposed. Up the top end until the chalk is a nice bright white instead of dull gray.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2010 00:14
|
|
|
Ric posted:My latest portrait, of an artist friend in his studio: It seems sort of gray, like it's lacking some needed contrast.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2010 00:46
|
|
|
Cannister posted:This is a really awkward pose - like she's cracking her neck or something. I also feel like you're really 'in her face' with this shot. Try out some other poses - direct her to a more natural looking stance. Also avoid her chin being closer to your lens than her forehead. A little head tilt would make her jaw look a bit less intense. The angle and the pose makes it look like the model is taking a myspace-angle photo of herself, especially since you can only see the top of the shoulder towards the camera. I would definitely back it up some or choose a different pose.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2010 15:58
|
|
|
Interrupting Moss posted:Musician portrait thingy. It's a bit cliche, but I think we ended up with something nice. Only thing I don't like is that little shadow created by her ear. I should have pulled that light around. Give the edge of the ear shadow a bit of blur or something. It's the sharpness of it that's distracting. Otherwise I dig it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2010 02:44
|
|
|
I've kind of toyed with the idea of taking make up lessons so I can at least do basic stuff during shoots. That would save a ton of work in post for casual shoots with no makeup artist. All I can say about good MUAs is that they're totally worth the money if the budget is available. HPL fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Sep 10, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2010 18:09
|
|
|
I'm thinking really simple stuff like taking care of shiny skin or noticeable blemishes so I don't have to spend ages dealing with unwanted highlights etc etc. Or at least learning enough about makeup that I can effectively communicate with the MUA as opposed to speaking in vague generalities.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2010 18:30
|
|
|
nonanone posted:HPL, what you want is to get some concealer and some foundation. The trick is to match the skin color, don't apply too heavily (concealer is for blemishes, foundation is for shine). But yeah, easy to look all this stuff up and just try it out I'm not worried about girls, it's if I'm doing a band promo shoot or something and I don't want guys faces shining like light bulbs.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2010 07:33
|
|
another option is just asking the model to do the basic makeup, most girls know how to.
|
Penpal posted: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. I like it. It's just oozing fun personality. I love the use of shallow depth of field to isolate the subject. That's really important with busy backgrounds like forest. You've done a good job of bringing enough color into the photo to give it richness without veering off into oversaturation. I like the way the lit branches up top funnel down to his head. It gives the photo some direction. If I could pick one nit, it would be that I would have liked to see more rim lighting around the shoulders but I understand that would have been difficult if not impossible given the circumstances.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2010 19:53
|
|
|
dunkman posted:100mm Macro too in case the 24-70 isn't long enough? Wow! Look at the stitching on that dress!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2010 02:36
|
|
|
I feel your pain. I've shot in plenty of clubs like that. Looks like you probably should have taken that monopod, put your camera on it, hoisted it up and taken a few Hail Mary shots.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2010 05:37
|
|
|
Cannister posted:How the hell. I would love to know more about how the guy who shot this achieved that without a reflector. I'm impressed! Looks like one of those dreary cloudy days much like Vancouver 90% of the time. Light bounces everywhere because the clouds act like a giant softbox.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2010 19:01
|
|
|
I think you've got the wrong accent on the "a". Isn't it supposed to be going the other way? Otherwise it's gay like happy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2010 23:05
|
|
|
Yeah, I would have told her to keep her mouth shut. In a good way.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2010 04:18
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Ultimately I think the problems are more with the model than you. She's more cute than sexy, except in the first images where she does a passable attempt at sexy. Was there a makeup artist on the shoot? I think that would have probably helped if there wasn't. The cuteness comes from the fact that she is either wearing very little makeup if any at all. Adding stuff like eye shadow, eyelashes and good lip color would go a long way to create a solidly sexy look. You can see in Paragon's photos how makeup really brings out the smouldering eyes of the model.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2010 23:01
|
|
|
The second one is a little overdone subject-wise but I'm digging the first one. Neat pose and lighting and it looks like she's getting abducted by aliens or something. Kudos for paying enough attention to make sure shadows from her hands didn't get on her face or the rest of her.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2010 00:49
|
|
|
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. Odd as this sounds, the clothes on the woman are too flattering. She barely looks pregnant so it comes off more like an engagement shoot.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2010 16:42
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:And I don't understand why you cut their heads off in that middle one. Emphasis on the belly. But it goes back to my earlier point, she's so small it doesn't make that much sense. I would have either had her wear a tighter top, a top without a pattern on it or done more profile shots.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2010 22:27
|
|
|
Nowadays I try to shoot a little wider than what I think is good at the time because it's a lot easier to crop the photo a little than to shake your fist at the screen and curse because you cut off a toe or something.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 22:13
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:That's interesting you would say that. My one professor wouldn't let us crop at ALL- also for confidence building. I suppose either method can work, depending how you're approaching it. It's more about avoiding those situations where you have a 99% awesome shot except you left a fingertip out of the frame for one reason or another. I'm not really talking about shooting with fifty miles of space around the subject, more like finding the shot I like then taking a half step back just to be sure. I've also found it helped for composition like if I wanted the person a little more over to the side or a little higher or lower in the frame or whatever. It takes a nice photo and puts a little more polish on it. Or polishes the turd as often happens in my case. HPL fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Jan 7, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 23:38
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:I'm more upset with other straight male photographers that reinforce negative stereotypes that make my job harder than a female or gay photographer's job being easier. Get married. That works. Either that or network well so that your good reputation precedes you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 23:55
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Which is what I've done! The latter at least. Wear a huge wedding band!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 00:02
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:That being said, I think her complexion looks like poo poo in #1 but otherwise I like it. I like her expression and it is well composed. I think it looks fine. You know, brown people and all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2011 06:14
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:Because all brown people have bumpy skin, oh yes. What? She has great skin. It's just not airbrushed to hell like a mannequin (no offense, Mannequin). If that's how she looks with little or no makeup, then that's damned good compared to a lot of women. On the other hand, if she looked like that after a full-on professional makeup session, then yikes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2011 17:24
|
|
|
Man_alive posted:You know, I didn't really notice the tree out of her head until you mentioned it...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
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.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 06:01
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:How much other photography do you look at? Not trying to insult the guy, but there really isn't anything noteworthy that should make it memorable unless you only look at photos here in the dorkroom. There are hundreds, if not thousands of people with off camera lighting that do shots that could be slipped in without anyone noticing. It's not a technical thing. He seems to be able to coax a relatively relaxed, comfortable look from most of his subjects. I know from his past work that he has been working hard on it. Considering that he largely works with non-models that aren't used to being photographed and in fact may be uncomfortable with being photographed, I think he does a decent enough job of it. Of course lots of people light photos better or compose better or whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 00:27 |
|
|
Just about any band would be happy with photos like that. If I have any beefs, it's that I would like to see a tad more light on the shadow areas of the subjects faces and the lead singer needs more back and rim light since she's disappearing into the background a little. I like the simple background. It matches well with the band's attire.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2011 02:11
|
|