Kelsey
PhotoCamel: Your friendly photo community, with free discussion forums, digital photography reviews, photo sharing, galleries, downloads, blogs, photography contests, and prizes.
 


Go Back   PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > Photography by Genre: Critique and Discussion > Fashion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-18-2012   #1
Vicuna
 
Location: Southwest Indiana
Posts: 175
CamelKarma: 5960
Editing OK?: Ask first
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Kelsey

Here's a few from a recent session:

#1:


#2:


#3:


#4:

__________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register for your free account today and become a member of PhotoCamel to open up the site's many benefits and features.
__________________
Official Threadkiller
ingramimages is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2012   #2
Dromedary
 
MDPhoto's Avatar
 
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,693
CamelKarma: 6548
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

Nice set. For me I think a touch more light on her eyes in the first two would be a plus but it is minor. The third shot is excellent, her intense gaze at the camera is captivating.
__________________
Mike D.
Nikon D90, D80
Assortment of glass

There are always two people in every picture: the photographer and the viewer. ~Ansel Adams
MDPhoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2012   #3
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
F1 Camel
 
keithdewey3's Avatar
 
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,451
CamelKarma: 606787
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

A very nice set. I think it is cool you stepped out of the box with your lighting and went dramatic.
It really doesn't work for me. It is just a personal preference but I think the harder lighting works best on head and shoulders shots.
I still think this is a good set and very well done. I would just like to see a little softer shadows here.
__________________
Happiness is a state of mind. It doesn't need to be pursued.

Keith

http://www.keithfosterphotography.com/
keithdewey3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2012   #4
Vicuna
 
Location: Southwest Indiana
Posts: 175
CamelKarma: 5960
Editing OK?: Ask first
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDPhoto View Post
Nice set. For me I think a touch more light on her eyes in the first two would be a plus but it is minor. The third shot is excellent, her intense gaze at the camera is captivating.
Agreed on the eyes. Part of the experiment, I suppose. Getting ready to post a bridal portrait in the weddings section where I was a bit more successful with the lighting placement....

Quote:
Originally Posted by keithdewey3 View Post
A very nice set. I think it is cool you stepped out of the box with your lighting and went dramatic.
Yes - I was 'experimenting' with a new modifier.... Going for more dramatic than soft.
__________________
Official Threadkiller
ingramimages is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2012   #5
Camel Breath
 
thcofer's Avatar
 
Location: Fredericktown, MO
Posts: 11,231
CamelKarma: 64020146
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

Nice shots. I like #3 best. I think the last one should have had her body turned a wee bit more toward camera. You might have tried having her right knee bent a bit or something. The bow in her leg just doesn't look right IMO.
__________________
___________

Tom C.

Failure means you tried. Success means you need to set higher goals for yourself.
thcofer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2012   #6
F1 Camel
 
Sailor Blue's Avatar
 
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 4,140
CamelKarma: 227845
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

Number 3 is the best by far. I would like a little better lighting on the face and I suggest you tone down the brightness on her breasts above the bra - that area is so bright it is distracting. Actually that is a common problem since faces get more sunshine than the body, tan more, and are darker.

As mentioned, the lighting doesn't work well on the first two images. Glamor lighting is generally pretty flat, not high contrast like you used, but it is always interesting to experiment and try different things.

The clinched hands are bad in the second image and the model has thrown out her chest so much that it simply looks uncomfortable, not sexy.

The pose in the fourth image needs work. Sifting the model's weight to the back foot and bending the front leg so the foot is up on point (i.e. only the toe is touching) and pointed at the camera, is much more flattering than the reverse. Benji has described how to do this several times, most recently a couple of days ago.

Here is more of Benji's technique. The 45 stance is good. Try counter lighting your model, i.e. place her back to the light and have her rotate her upper body and head back to where the face is actually looking past the camera about 20 while she brings her eyes back to the lens. This produces a nice light/shadow pattern across the upper body and face without over emphasizing the bust. Of course for glamor you may want to do the opposite.
__________________
--Don--

Canon 7D, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II, Tamron SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, Tamron SP 90MM F/2.8 Di 1:1 Macro
Nissin Di866, Electra CLASSIC Plus studio strobes & modifiers
Sekonic L-358 Flash Meter, Yongnuo RF-602 Transmitters & Receivers
Dell 20" 2001F (1200x1800) IPS monitor, Samsung SyncMaster 23" F2380 (1920x1280) PVA monitor, Datacolor Spyder3Elite for monitor calibration
Sailor Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2012   #7
Photocamel Master
 
Bobby Deal's Avatar
 
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 8,442
CamelKarma: 19116378
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

Glamour lighting does not have to be soft and glossy. I shoot hard edged dramatic glamour all the time but it has to be well executed and carefully planned you cant just start pointing mono lights with reflectors at a model there has to be a plan to the light. You have to know what you want to achieve going in. If you don't you might as well sit down and think about it until you do or else you will just be spraying and praying while you shoot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Blue View Post
Number 3 is the best by far. I would like a little better lighting on the face and I suggest you tone down the brightness on her breasts above the bra - that area is so bright it is distracting. Actually that is a common problem since faces get more sunshine than the body, tan more, and are darker.

As mentioned, the lighting doesn't work well on the first two images. Glamor lighting is generally pretty flat, not high contrast like you used, but it is always interesting to experiment and try different things.

The clinched hands are bad in the second image and the model has thrown out her chest so much that it simply looks uncomfortable, not sexy.

The pose in the fourth image needs work. Sifting the model's weight to the back foot and bending the front leg so the foot is up on point (i.e. only the toe is touching) and pointed at the camera, is much more flattering than the reverse. Benji has described how to do this several times, most recently a couple of days ago.

Here is more of Benji's technique. The 45 stance is good. Try counter lighting your model, i.e. place her back to the light and have her rotate her upper body and head back to where the face is actually looking past the camera about 20 while she brings her eyes back to the lens. This produces a nice light/shadow pattern across the upper body and face without over emphasizing the bust. Of course for glamor you may want to do the opposite.
__________________
"The only photographer we ought compare ourselves to is the one we used to be"
Bobby Deal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2012   #8
Photocamel Master
 
Bobby Deal's Avatar
 
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 8,442
CamelKarma: 19116378
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

For me I see several issues that can be addressed in future shoots.

1. The color pallet is all too harmonious, matchy matchy. When the tones are all so similar it is hard to get the contrast that makes the images pop and one of the biggest problems with these is they are simply boring. Flat color, inexperienced non emotive model, under exposed or over exposed but none of them properly exposed. They were good practice for you and after getting feedback here you will go back make changes and come back with better results from your next shoot.

Can I ask how are you determining the correct exposure for your photos? I am guessing trail and error until it looks good on the back of the camera and then you are always surprised when you unload the card and they shots are not as correctly exposed as you believed while shooting?

To be successful in studio photography there are two things you have to master.

1. Controlling the light.

If the light is not where you need it to be you have to learn how to put it there.

If it does not have the quality you need it to have you need to know how to effectively modify it to be what you need it to be.

Light is like water iot travels the path of least resistance, can be split and deflected by an obstruction but given enough room to travel it will pull back together and the further it travels the less effective power it produces.

2. Proper posing technique which means we have to study the physical characteristics of the human anatomy.

Every pose starts at the foundation and ends at the eyes and you control every moving part from one end to the other.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction and you need to understand them on multiple body types.

You need to be able to recognize what flatters a subject and what doesn't and be able and willing to make changes to position where needed. Especially when working with a model that has no clue and is simply standing comfortably and hoping she looks pretty.

Once you know those things then you can start working on
Understanding how distortion effects an image
Composition
Styling
Makeup Design etc.

and then POST PRODUCTION because no photo comes out of the camera as good as it can be. Not even one that was "Got Right In The Camera"

So don't worry to much and expect to cover all the bases at once, move forward steadily and logically and it will suddenly all come together for you.
__________________
"The only photographer we ought compare ourselves to is the one we used to be"
Bobby Deal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2012   #9
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
Guanaco
 
flutterbydragonfly's Avatar
 
Location: Colorado
Posts: 462
CamelKarma: 7809
Editing OK?: Ask first
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

I am enjoying the moody lighting. I am no pro but I am practicing writing about images so here it goes..

1. I love this image. the only thing I would change is to have her on the other side of the frame as I find uncomfortable tension when I am looking at it because she is so close to the edge. I would also brighten her eyes in this shot.

2. I don't think this is an attractive pose for her.....just my humble opinion.

3. Great look in her face and I like the concept very much but the composition confuses my eyes for some reason, not sure why.

4. I like the lighting and her clothing very much but I am not sure about the pose.

Please, please remember that I am a new portrait photographer myself. I know what I like when I see it and I am in the process of learning to identify why I like a particular look over another. Lovely work here!
__________________
Debi

"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." - Lewis Hine


"To practice any art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow. So do it." - Kurt Vonnegut
flutterbydragonfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2012   #10
Vicuna
 
Location: Southwest Indiana
Posts: 175
CamelKarma: 5960
Editing OK?: Ask first
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Kelsey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Deal View Post

Can I ask how are you determining the correct exposure for your photos? I am guessing trail and error until it looks good on the back of the camera and then you are always surprised when you unload the card and they shots are not as correctly exposed as you believed while shooting?
Do I have a flashmeter? No. Was I totally winging it? Also no.

I used basic settings that I have used in the past with success, but with a new modifier. Consequently, yes - I did have to correct the RAW file about 3/4's of a stop when I opened it.

Your points are valid, and I hope, well taken.


__________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register for your free account today and become a member of PhotoCamel to open up the site's many benefits and features.
__________________
Official Threadkiller
ingramimages is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

« PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > Photography by Genre: Critique and Discussion > Fashion »


Share this topic:

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kelsey 2011 Senior starbuck Portraits (Advanced Critique) 2 10-29-2010 06:29 AM
Kelsey marivil Portraits 6 07-18-2010 11:46 AM