|
xenilk posted:I'm having a really hard time working with a male subject, I will have to work on it... the postures/positions of the hands/body just doesn't speak to me as much. You need to figure out body language. If you are just relying on what you like to see a woman do, even if that gives you easy quick results, you'll still be stunted as a photographer. Know what kind of body posture speaks different things about people, go to the mall and do life drawing (don't worry if it's poo poo) and pay attention to what makes a person look upbeat, or down-trodden, or what makes a member of the military easy to spot even when sitting (straight back, shoulders up). If you know what body posture says, you can get men or women to pose in a way that works with your shoot idea. Not every shot of a woman do you want them looking slinky and sexy, sometimes some shoots might require some manliness, or aggression, etc. Knowing body language will aid in this.
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2011 11:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:How does that have anything to do with what I said and what the poster asked? What nonanone said, plus what you said implies that all gay men will shoot the same way, as if their orientation will ensure one mode of thinking, as apposed to them being fully formed people with 100% agency and a plethora of styles and choices. (cause you know, women and gay men are people too). It sounds like you're projecting, that you shoot all women a certain way based on what you find attractive (rather than what the shot requires, with full knowledge of anatomy, body language, and visual styles) so gay men must do the same, but with a different gender target of their affection. Sure there are really bad gay photographers that just want to shoot abs ( abs!   ) and butts, but they're no different from the straight creepers that use photography as a way to get young girls to act out their fantasies.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2011 14:58
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:I was more trying to point out that bringing a gay man for his fantabulous point of view wasn't necessary. I read the OP as bringing a gay guy as the subject because they would know better how to pose (also a stereotype). Sure their point as you understand it is crass, but your objection didn't point to that, it just sounded like you were implying that gay men can't bring anything unique to the table as a photographer so don´t bother.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2011 15:36
|
|
|
nonanone posted:I'm never sure why either, considering TONS of portraits are all natural light or one light, very rarely do you see 16 light setups for people. Obviously you don't need lights to shoot a portrait, but you do need lights to engineer the lighting for a portrait. If you really dig lighting and want to start playing with soft vs hard light and direction, well, it's kind of hard to move the sun, and window lighting is great, but it's pretty safe and can be boring. You don't need lights, but they sure are fun.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 16:37
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:I've been asking strangers for portraits while walking around lately. He's got an interesting face, but I don't think the contrast of this film works well with these images. The sky is super bright with little detail, the shadows are ultra dark and muddy, but then his face isn't all that contrasty or clear. He's got good face structure, but you can barely make it out. Technical aspect aside, while it's interesting to see him in such a different distance and position in the 3rd, and the bright orange hoody is what makes it work, there really isn't anything engaging in the first 2, he's just kind of standing there. If he was beautiful and well lit, I could stare at his beauty and make that the object of the photo, but when the lighting is middling, no expression, no story, just a stiff stance, there isn't enough interest to make me spend any time with it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2011 23:51
|
|
|
Mathturbator posted:What size softbox is perfect for headshots? Got a 22" and I kinda feel it's too small. Answer: All of them. Lighting isn't a one size fits all solution. It's like asking what lens to use for a landscape photo. The answer depends on your intentions. You can do beautiful headshots with almost any sized softbox or umbrella. If you're just after bog standard safe Sears-portrait lighting, just get a middle sized one, 45 degrees up and to one side, and you're good, but if you want to learn how to light, learn what different sizes and distances will do for the image. gh0st posted:new year's photo resolution numero uno...more people pictures. I like it for the most part, but I can't understand what type of real world situation would create lighting like this. It just kind of screams flash without any dynamic or engaging reason why.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
thetzar posted:A couple more new ones from me; a co-worker who's leaving the company shortly. Really love both of these. The tones and color on the first one are particularly pleasing. I love how light and airy it feels while still defining the planes of his face.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2012 14:38
|
|
|
Shot some corporate head shots for our new company. Gridded softbox main and then a lightly uncovered white umbrella on axis for fill. I think I have a shot where I did not set off the umbrella to show the difference it made. We focus mainly on games, which is why I wanted smiles all around.   
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 22:26
|
|
|
dukeku posted:Zone 0, Zone 1, who's keeping track? Yeah a snooted rim for the shoulders would have made some separation, but the goal was also to use the photos for a 3D, low poly, head sculpture, and we wanted almost black in the back side. gunnar (View in 3D) jon (View in 3D)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2013 10:58
|
|
|
Gazmachine posted:Can you expand on this project, or is it hush hush? Basically you've mentioned videogames, you've shown me a 3D model, you have my attention. My husband, who is a programmer, and myself, a 3D artist, have made a new app studio focusing on videogames. We wanted a way to present us and our two marketing guys in a way that capitalizes on our 3D abilities for the website, https://www.snjohus.com I have not finished the 3d version of myself or Ágúst, but when we do, we will figure out how to integrate them into the website.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2013 12:42
|
|
|
Not often I get to be in front of the camera, and even less frequent that there are lights involved. Visiting photographer friend wanted to photograph us, and we took this in our greenhouse. Designed to show the cluttered life we are living as new parents, as well as my husband's love of gardening. Fuji X100 and a Softlighter just outside the greenhouse to camera left at about 2.5 meter height providing the main light. I did the post work.  
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:i hope ur husband is growing mad weed in there Hah, not yet, but the moment it is decriminalized in Iceland we plan to. :-) evil_bunnY posted:Congrats mang! Thanks! It's a lot of work, but I love it. Fart Car '97 posted:I like the first one a lot but the second one feels very forced Strange, because it's not hard for us to find ourselves kissing his head. It was an impromptu pose in between facing the camera. I like this one a bit more for our heads, but the standing poses aren't as nice.  365 Nog Hogger posted:So that's where you've been! I mean, it has been keeping us busy, but I've been photographing like hell. Just not much that I will share, cause.. baby photos. :-) We did some kitchen ones too, to focus on my love of cooking, but I don't think they were nearly as successful. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:
Love the image, but I so want to straighten it (so the window/door edge is parallel to the edge of the image)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2015 14:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
alkanphel posted:
I love this one if for no other reason it shows that the subject can take up a minuscule amount of the overall picture space, and still be the obvious and blatant focal point. Makes me want to try something similar, but see how complicated the neutral space can get before it stops working.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 14:31
|
|
