|
I prefer the gary fong lightsphere personally. I used the sto-fen omni bounce for a while but it doesn't soften as well as the light sphere does. It's expensive but the light output was worth it to me.
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2018 03:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
DJExile posted:I'm not sure if it's her makeup or the post processing or what, but her face almost looks like it's wax Agreed. I think its a decent portrait (lighting and pose) but her skin looks like it was retouched way too far. It lost all form of texture to the point of being unnaturally smooth/soft. Her hands also look overly soft/retouched but that could just be compounded by being in the foreground and out of focus. Do you have the original to compare against?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2018 04:05
|
|
|
Thom12255 posted:I'm going to redo it with just my normal frequency separation method and see what you guys think. It is just the texture rather than the tones that look off? Tone and color all seem fine, her eyes look really bright/sharp/saturated but it might just be because compared to the skin, they stand out more. With normal skin texture, the eyes might not seem so bright/sharp. As for freq. separation, thats usually my favorite way to go for major skin retouching but I don't go that far into most of my portraits/wedding photos anymore unless someone really needs it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Some Lightroom 10 color grading test photos: The orange highlights in this one look overexposed. You can still see a lot of texture in the blue side of his face but the orange side loses a lot of detail. This to me suggests you might want to reconsider the ratios or spacing/positioning of your two lights with one another. Also, sometimes darker gels and soak up more light than lighter colored gels even if both lights are on the same power. Did you have these gels just on top of the bare light? I personally love the less harsh look of putting a diffuser of some sort after the gel to soften the light a little bit making the color casts a little less harsh but thats personal preference.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2020 23:59
|
|
|
bellows lugosi posted:it means your portraits look more about the use of lights than of portraits, the strobes and flashes and modifiers dominate the image This is probably the most accurate and concise feedback on these images. It seems like you're using extra light because you want to use lights, not because the scene necessarily calls for them. You're using a model in a few scenarios that suggest natural light to be the primary light source, (windows etc) but you're fighting it with bright artificial strobes from odd angles that don't feel natural. It might just be my screen but almost everything seems over exposed. It's really easy to think "I just need this piece of gear to make beautiful images" but learning how and when to use light is more important than a new diffuser or box if you don't know where to put it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2022 21:16
|
|
|
I don't comment on here all that much anymore but this is amazing. Looking through the progression actually made me pretty emotional and you captured such incredible images from a technical standpoint but also absolute perfection from a sentimental perspective. Her personality comes through and you really nailed candid "childhood" perfectly.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2023 21:54
|
|
|
For portraiture, I tend to really love longer focal lengths if you have the space for it. The compression is so flattering and the depth of field can get dreamy. Back when I was shooting weddings, I loved shooting with my 70-200 2.8 as the couple was walking away or towards me from 20-30+ feet away. You just get incredible separation from the background. It can be tricky to stay stable at those focal lengths if you don't have enough light without a tripod but when it works it's great. The last portraits I shot for work, I used a Sony g 135 1.8 and it was fantastic. My boss, not the biggest photo guy, was curious about my rental lens selection (telephotos) when we set up our last branding shoot. I did a few test shots with each lens to see how we were feeling and I immediately chose the shots from the 135. When he saw the comparison he got it immediately.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2024 13:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
Thats badass. For a modern photo to be taken, you have to really investigate the clues that tell you it was taken in the last 50 years. I hear a spaghetti western soundtrack in my head.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2024 18:38
|
|