|
Acc-Risk posted:That's exactly where I'm at now. I know what I like and not, but not really "why" I know why and why I don't, but only after review.. I can't take that knowledge and set up a new shoot using what i've learnt.
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2009 12:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
70-100mm is the happy zone for most modelling shots, but if you want to make an average person look good, then there's nothing wrong with using a more wide angle shot, providing it's not a full length body shot, and is shot from above. Just review it carefully. It'll really accentuate whatever's closest to the camera. It's the professional equivalent to the myspace shot. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Jul 22, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2009 03:52
|
|
|
What's the terminology used for when the light is hitting the side of the face that's facing the camera, and its opposite term for when it's the "dark side" of the face that's facing the camera. squidflakes - you've used the former here. Works well. Very by the book.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2009 20:42
|
|
|
I'm in the middle of post for this shot I took of a charming Englishman who had some tales to tell as he poured coffee crystals into his plastic bottle of milk. So far i've done a fair bit of experimenting with this photo, and I quite like the look so far. Any thoughts around the PP?  Orig picture here if anyone cares.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2009 02:28
|
|
|
Cheers for the tips. I'll go dodge/burn crazy and see what I come up with. They don't do his bright eyes justice, they were bloody glowing I tell ya. A step in the right direction? I'm worried I might be overdoing it now. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Dec 22, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2009 22:53
|
|
|
Haha, my thoughts exactly. *dials it down a notch* Didn't want him to look like the next muad'dib, but Ive entered the "look at something too much and it'll lose meaning" phase. Like saying the word "Spoon" too many times. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Dec 22, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2009 23:43
|
|
|
The spice may extend life for some people, but hopefully take three is better. I'm actually worried I overcooked the burn/dodge on his face. Hmph. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Dec 23, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2009 01:50
|
|
|
the posted:How as this taken? From the style i'd say it's one of Martin Schoeller's too. Google the name and see if there are many 'behind the scenes' videos.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2010 07:39
|
|
|
Ric posted:These are some shots from a series I'm doing of people at work. I've put them small here for the sake of everyone's scrolling, but please click the links and look at them bigger. Easily my fav  Where you did place the lights?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2010 02:50
|
|
|
Love the way the model pops away from the background.. would be better without the cord on the left. How was it lit?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2010 01:35
|
|
|
Question time: What are peoples favourite set ups for interesting/creative single strobe (strictly one light source) portrait sessions?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2010 02:30
|
|
|
First real portrait session ever.. Thought I'd try my hand at portrait/glamor shooting, as one of my photographer friends was bringing around her newbie model friend for a few test shots. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2010 01:39
|
|
|
Alright, a few B&W's. I have my own favourites, but my point of view is well known for not being that of my audiences. i.e. - I can't tell if they're good or not  Sometimes I get next to zero comments on some of my personal favs, yet sometimes it's the last minute additions to Flickr uploads that get the most feedback of all.   
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2010 07:35
|
|
|
In an ideal world, I would have also: Used a more open lens.. the bokeh that the trees make isn't the best, so the quicker it blurs out, the better. Wireless flash behind him. This would give you some wicked rim lighting. Other than that, I really like it
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2010 00:07
|
|
|
Great separation of background and subject on that first shot, but the slight lean of the picture frame is irking me horribly  Did you approach the business magazine and ask if they had anything you could do?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2010 00:27
|
|
|
The company I work for are about to overhaul their Intranet, and I'm pretty sure I could sell them some headshot work for their corporate pages. Now I'm thinking of various generic lighting set ups I can use that won't need to be changed, regardless of who steps in front of me. I'm thinking just a 45 degree transparent umbrella on a semi reflective background.. Should give enough of a specular on the background to make them pop a little. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Jan 19, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2011 04:07
|
|
|
Regarding the negative space - Learn the rule of thirds. The face is the focal point, yet it's almost in the very center of the frame. A big no no. It's fine for taking pictures of cats with your mums Cybershot, but not for anything semi-pro. On another note, I've been asked to shoot some editorial and promotional stuff for a local band. Years of strobist workshops and set up shots are coming back to me and I can't decide what I want to go with I'm doing it for free because they're good mates and they got me a working pass to Bon Jovi, so I'm not fussing too much. http://www.myspace.com/thescarletsrock/photos/albums/album/1512041#mssrc=SitesPhotos_SP_AlbumCover_ViewAlbum These are their current promo shots - They were done by a highly regarded professional, but I think I could do better. At least, I've seen other people do better, and I have their set up shots. What could go wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 03:47
|
|
|
Ended up doing a shoot for my friends band. I did it for free, now I know the rule of "Just because a business isn't profitable doesn't make them 'non-profit'" of the "Should I work for free?" flowchart but I owed them after they got me working pass for the Bon Jovi tour in Melbourne     Super simple set up.  The lead singer is a former full time model, and it shows in every pic I take of her.. She can't do 'natural'
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2011 02:08
|
|
|
psylent posted:I did a couple of corporate headshot dealies a while back for a company I used to work for but never got around to posting them here for some savage crit. These are all from separate sessions hence the inconsistency in head sizes. The last one was shot landscape as the lady was 8 months pregnant and didn't want her belly showing. The two on black look a little soft, were you shooting wide open? The one on white is fantastic. Would go well on a white webpage for seamlessness too. The company I'm contracting for would kill for some good corporate headshots, and I'm keen to do them, I just know I have to approach it and ask them in the right way for them to treat me professionally (see also, pay me for it.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2011 05:56
|
|
|
 Portrait sessions. Staats #1 by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr  Portrait sessions. Staats #3 by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr Directing models while hoping your lightstands don't fall over in the wind is tough work.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 02:51
|
|
|
Gazmachine posted:That's some astounding quality in the close up. What are you shooting with? You don't wanna know.. It was shot with a 70-200 f2.8 Sigma on a Nikon D60. Cheap and nasty but it does the trick until I can afford to upgrade. She'd never modeled before and I'm not the most experienced in directing models (events/gigs/journalistic background) so I was pretty happy with what came out of it. Cheers for the shoulder line feedback, I haven't even thought of that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 23:56
|
|
|
Couple from this weekends shoot. Felicity in the park. by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr  Felicity in the park. by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr Had a hard time deciding on which to publish, seeing as I had a lot that were very similar as I was too attached to the shoot (i.e. I was there) to judge objectively.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2011 01:41
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:Her pose in this one is not nearly dynamic enough, and neither is your composition. She should be getting way more bendy and your comp should be taking advantage of it. Thanks very much for the feedback, it's appreciated. For what it's worth, these were the four similar shots that I had to choose from. The one I posted was the models favourite.  Felicity in the park. by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr  Felicity in the park. by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr  Felicity in the park. by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr  Felicity in the park. by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2011 02:29
|
|
|
 TFP model shoot last weekend. Lack of a stylist/budget/modelwithactualclothes means that the corset didn't fit her too well, but ya use what you can get.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2011 01:14
|
|
|
First shoot with my new beauty dish. Tried some texturing with two of them, didn't really add to the third so I left it. The first one's pretty boring but the model likes it. Shrug. I'm not convinced. Third's my fav.   
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 03:54
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Are these for some sort of joke? They were for a silly "Zombie pinup" runway competition at a recent Melbourne Tattoo expo. The Model jumped across the road to my place for a quick shoot before going to the comp. Dare I ask why? Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 06:15 on Sep 20, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 06:01
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:The grunge overlay, vignetting and zombification are all distracting and disconnected, to the point that they look like they're from a different image than the model. This is compounded by the posing, which is static, upright and unnatural: all things that are directly opposed to the supposed theme of 'Zombie Pinup.' somnambulist posted:I think the zombie bits look good, but that's just me. What I don't like though, is how clean and composed she seems to be despite the fact she has rotting flesh. It's not "enough". I'm not really suggesting to add more rotting bits, I'm just saying it doesn't look like it belongs. Her smile is way too clean, her face is too "pretty", even if it's a "pin up". Her eyes are too "beautified" ....they should be darker, glazed over, milky, scary looking. Thanks guys.. I do appreciate the feedback. The makeup was done by a first year special effects makeup artist wanting to get a few pics for her portfolio. I quite liked it, but I do see what you mean about being a little too fake, despite the detail in what's there. It's there and nowhere else kinda thing. I didn't want to digitally enhance the zombie bits at all, as that's all 100% special effects makeup, nothing digital about it. IMO, It's be false of me to enhance it to the point where it doesn't reflect what the MUA actually achieved.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2011 00:03
|
|
|
xenilk posted:Wait, you're new to photography but you casually mention to your hair dresser that you're a photographer? Were you trying to pick her up? I have an oven. I is chef? Honestly, either do it for free, or not at all.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2011 00:27
|
|
|
nonanone posted:The other thing is doing favors for friends can complicate things too. They'll expect "special rates", get mad if they're disappointed, and so on. It makes things difficult socially. I had a friend ask me if I could do headshots for her cousin in 3 days for free; I had to be all like "so sorry I'm way too busy!" and now she's pouty. "Do it for free, or for full price. Never for cheap" I've approached that situation before by saying you're too busy with paying clients. They'll get the hint.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2011 06:29
|
|
|
http://shouldiworkforfree.com/ You have no idea how offended a friend was(diva lead singer in a local rock band) when I gave them the "sorry, I'm too busy with paying clients" line, then gave them that link, as a half-joke-half-serious when they wanted me to shoot their EP's cover/publicity pics for nothing. She went off her NUT about how I know full well they don't make any money etc, it all goes right back into the band, etc etc etc. Yawn. I never said you made a profit. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Sep 23, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2011 06:47
|
|
|
Completely spur of the moment shoot outside a fashion show. Thoughts? What one(s) do you like/dislike? I've been hopeless at judging my own work recently. Can't tell what to keep and what to trash.    
Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 23:08 on Oct 3, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2011 23:06
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Fashion show or steam punk convention? It was a fetish/alternative expo/fashion show, and I was there doing photography for the show on behalf of one of the designers They had a few minutes to spare at the end of the show, and the designer wanted a few shots outside. All I had on me was the speedlight I was using for the show, so I threw a 1/2 CTO gel on it, sat it on a pillar, and shot against the outside of the building (an old town hall). Thanks for the comments so far. My screen isn't calibrated for colour unfortunately, so thanks for the too yellow comment too, I'll adjust it. 'Old rear end oil painting' was definitely in my mind while post processing them too, so a little 'yellow highlights, blue shadows' split toning helped me out there. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Oct 4, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2011 01:23
|
|
|
xenilk posted:Good eye, I agree with that. Maybe a slightly larger framing would have been better. Gotta love sperging about cutting limbs! I totally agree. My pet hate is usually cutting off guitar heads when looking at gig photos.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2011 22:51
|
|
|
psylent posted:That was on purpose, we'll trying to make the frontman stand out a bit more It doesn't look like it was done on purpose unfortunately. If you want to bring more attention, I'd do it with lighting. He's already in front, so there's that part already established, he just needs a little more push, and I think lighting, rather than focus would do it. Backlight's a fair bit too strong I think. It's making the lighting pretty inconsistent for the two guys on the edges, totally blowing out a side of their face, rather than working as a hairlight like the other two guys.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2011 02:04
|
|
|
 Intentional lens flare is hard to pull off. Thought i'd just have a go at it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2011 22:48
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:I think this looks pretty good, but I'd like to see more rimlight effect on the model. We're only getting a touch of hightlight right now despite the blast of light behind her. Seems like if you dialed that strobe up a stop you'd get the same flare, but with more effective rimlighting. Just my thought. Yea, I did that later on in the session, but the face/pose wasn't as strong unfortunately, so this won out.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2011 00:12
|
|
|
Our biggest photo project to date.. 7 models of various experience (one's been doing it for 5 years, one's been doing it for 3 weeks), and multiple makeup artists. Talk about a crazy weekend of shooting.  Each person was shot with the same lighting set up for consistency. I wanted something straight on so it'd be the same for all, and this was the most interesting I could come up with. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2011 01:47
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:Nice, I dig that.. good production values. Cheers. Actual cost: The orange juice and cookies you see on our kitchen bench in the set up shot :]
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2011 04:29
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:Our biggest photo project to date.. 7 models of various experience (one's been doing it for 5 years, one's been doing it for 3 weeks), and multiple makeup artists. FYI, the wife just wrote up the "Behind the Scenes" for this shoot. http://blogs.mczany.com/ Some day we'll invest in a decent SLR w/ video and get some cool BTS vids out of it. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 06:42 on Nov 14, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2011 06:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
Trying new stuff, Lighting-wise, as well as PP-wise. Thoughts?   
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2011 04:17
|
|