[OreoCookie]

@Jawbone
Your model has a great attitude, great work.

Posted too late, of course, I was referring to the lady in the yellow dress

[Jawbone54]

Muchos gracias. I was really lucky that she was the fun-loving, do anything type. I didn't post the crazier shots, but there are plenty.

[Tesselator]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Taken two days ago: my little girl.

I really like this shot! Worthy of a wall hanging!

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

I really like this shot! Worthy of a wall hanging!

Thank ya, sir. It's so hard getting a picture of her since she, for whatever reason, thinks of my lens hood as a chew toy.

[jasonsRX7]

I'm no photographer, but I have fun trying. I took this and entered it in a contest on a message board, and it won, so I was happy.

[analogika]

Wow. *So* many things that might be coincidence, or story.

That's great.

[IceEnclosure]

nice.

what's he celebrating?

[James L]

'k, critique away. From a shoot today:







Cheers!

[James L]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Taken two days ago: my little girl.

You'll have to excuse me... I'm off to Flickr to fave this.

[boy8cookie]

I don't think #3 is a crop of #1, the smiles are different.

[Peter]

CHEESE! on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[ghporter]

Siamese kittens are about the second cutest creatures in the world (Himalayan kittens top the list). That's a great picture, Peter. It has both motion and stillness, with the kitten at the left seeming to be posing while her brothers and sisters seem to be all fidgeting. The colors are great, and I like the depth-or rather lack of depth-of field, keeping that one kitten sharply focused while the others do their own thing.

The only thing I'd do with this composition wise is to crop out the small portion of the fifth kitten at the right edge.

[James L]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

1 and 3 are a hard flash (camera left) and a I guess a diffusion panel or umbrella
right? For No. 1 if you use a gobo it would look way better. On No. 3 a gobo of
course isn't needed as you can't see the hard shadows. I like No. 3 best of all.
What's No. 2, two umbrellas or an umbrella and a bounce flash off of something

These all had the same setup actually.

The key light is a shoot through umbrella from camera right. There are two bare flashes camera left and right behind the model, to provide rim lighting. Kind of interesting actually that you mention the gobo. I set up this shot for a person that is more square on to the camera. The rim lighting looked quite nice. In the first photo she turned to the left, which allowed the rim lighting from camera left to hit her back much more square on. I hadn't noticed that actually. Good call!

Here's another from the shoot:

[Mastrap]

For a model with her skin you might want to rethink your lighting.

[OreoCookie]

Why? I think it adds character … (I don't like photoshopped models).

[James L]

Originally Posted by Mastrap 

For a model with her skin you might want to rethink your lighting.

Why? I think it adds character … (I don't like photoshopped models).

That's always the big debate, isn't it?

These photos are from a photographers meetup that we do about once every 4-8 weeks here in Vancouver. Yesterday we had 20 photographers, and 5 models booked (on a TFP/TFCD basis). We pick different locations and try different lighting techniques.

After the shoot, we go through our shot and see what we did. The photographers usually end up with 20-30 shots that came out alright, and send 4-5 to the model. At the end of the day the model usually has 20-30 unique images to add to his/her portfolio.

So, I like this last photo, but I can understand what you are saying regarding her skin. I prefer non photoshopped skin, others prefer the smooth skin we usually see in glamour photography. I think I could spend 5-15 minutes on her skin and smooth it a bit, but I will leave it up to her. If she decides to use the image I'll post produce it in line with her wishes.

Thanks for your thoughts!

[Oisín]

I like that last one a lot, James (the umbrella is perhaps just a tiny bit blown out, though?). The first three ones are all very good photographs, but the fact that her smile looks like an alien object glued to her face ruins them completely as pictures, to me.

[Mastrap]

I wasn't suggesting photoshopping her skin. There are thing you can do with lighting that make the best of what your model has to offer. In this case the very directional light is emphasizing the blemishes of her skin. A softer light would have been kinder.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by James L 

You'll have to excuse me... I'm off to Flickr to fave this.

Ha...thank you, sir. I'm proud that my doghter is getting some loving.

[Chuckit]

I agree with Mastrap that the lighting is a little harsh. There's no need to shop out the texture of her skin (I hate that too), but if you're going to photograph somebody with a pudgy stomach, it's probably best not to put them in a belly shirt.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Mastrap 

I wasn't suggesting photoshopping her skin. There are thing you can do with lighting that make the best of what your model has to offer. In this case the very directional light is emphasizing the blemishes of her skin. A softer light would have been kinder.

Actually, I have to agree that it adds more than it detracts here (at least in the last picture). The strong, harsh light and the texture it emphasises in her skin really give the skin a story, I think. I don’t think the last shot would have been as effective or evocative if her skin ‘blemishes’ had been mollified by a softer light.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

I might do:

See, as far as I'm concerned that emphazises the blemishes even more. I really dislike oversaturation in skin tones, it just doesn't work for me.

[analogika]

That edit just looks like she overdosed on the self-tanning lotion.

[Chuckit]

She looks rather oompa-loompaish to me too.

[Rampant1]

a handful of recent shots, most of them from the backyard, all are full frame with minor color/contrast corrections in Photoshop.


A bit unbalanced...


First successful attempt at water drops.


Baby Robins, they were out of the nest three or four days after this shot.


Need to work on the color here, a little too blue...


My boy on the mound, too bad the batter was doing a check swing, could use some cropping on the right.

More photos here, some creative, some mundane.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

I like it. I wanna see more color contrast too though.
I might do:

Way too oversaturated, it doesn't fit the mood of the picture. If it were a young girl in crazy clothes, it might have another effect.

I don't use photoshop much, though

By the way, you'll probably like one particular setting in Aperture 2 which increases saturation for all colors except skin tones. Works well on Asians and darker types, too.

Edit: I've just read that you can barely see the difference between the two. Are you sure? Is your monitor calibrated (mine is)? The green has become neon-sign-like green (very, very bright and intense), her skin tone went from a becoming yellowish/brownish to `I fell face down in a bowl of rouge.'

[analogika]

Ah - I was worried there for a bit that *my* monitor was completely off (it's quick-and-dirty calibrated only).

[Oisín]

^ Very different, yes.


Rampant1: I love numbers one, two, and three. Four is a bit uninteresting in composition—nothing really stands out and draws any attention.

And –


What did you do to this poor kid’s arm?!?

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

Like this from Boris:

The plot thickens…

[Face Ache]

Originally Posted by James L 

I'm a shameless slut when it comes to Photoshop. Here's a quick stab at this pic...

'shopped cheek, smoothed skin, adjusted facial skin tone to closer match hand.

No longer an accurate portrait, of course.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by James L 

Here's another from the shoot:

The more versions I've seen of this shot, I like the original the best, to be honest.

I would change two things...

1. Compositionally, I would try to have the center of the umbrella (that is what that is, right?) directly behind her head, where all the prominent lines lead directly to her face. The grouping just to the right of her head is distracting from the most important part of a portrait: the eyes.

2. A very slight bump in green saturation in this shot, either in Lightroom, Aperture, or ACR.

Overall, I think this is a very pretty shot, and I'd be extremely pleased with it if I were you.

Originally Posted by Rampant1 

First successful attempt at water drops.

This is my favorite image of the ones you posted. I don't have much of a critique here...the picture is very nice.

Here's one picture of a shoot I had today with a ridiculously cute little girl named Isabel...

[IceEnclosure]

Today on the beach:





Flickr: android in florida's Photostream

Tess, don't go editing my sky into your Prismacolor view of the world, k?

[OreoCookie]

@Tess
You should invest $60-70 in a hardware calibration tool, e. g. a ColorSpyder. The improvement is substantial.

@IceEnclosure
You're one lucky bastard
The composition is nice, although some of the shadows are a bit distracting (in particular the one of the second palm and of the white concrete structure/sculpture/bench). The colors are awesome, hard to believe they're real

The bottom one is good, too, although I find the overlap between the jet skis and the concrete thing distracting. I like the idea to include the sign, gives the scene a sense of identity.

[ghporter]

Ice, I officially want you to know that I hate you. At least for now, while your weather is really nice. I haven't even had decent enough weather to take pictures of our cars outdoors (and I'm NOT taking any of them in the garage!), let alone gorgeousness like that. The last time I saw water that color was in the Caymans, and that was a long time ago... Post more lovely beach stuff any time!

[IceEnclosure]

Between people, ugly boats and such, I didn't have many choices for recomposing the shots. I suppose I could have cloned out the second palm tree's shadow above but then I couldn't post this photo evar:


beach day on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
(anyone notice the dip in the ocean-horizon line? It comes down slightly in the middle. I think I took this on the wide end of my 18-55 kit lens)

I think I need to learn to read the histogram, because viewing these images in the bright sun on the viewfinder is ridiculous.

and thanks for the comments!

[Oisín]

I think I need to learn to read the histogram, because viewing these images in the bright sun on the viewfinder is ridiculous.

Me too. Using the viewfinder in bright sunlight is complete guesswork that’s more likely to be way off than anywhere near accurate.

[Oisín]

No post-processing of any kind, whatsoever. Import into Aperture, export to JPG. What should I do?

[Rampant1]

It's a great shot as is. I'd mess it for sure if I tried to do anything at all with something like that.

[Oisín]

I just discovered (yes, I’m slow!) that there’s a straighten tool in Aperture. That might have been put to good use here, since the building looks a bit lopsided.

[OreoCookie]

Yes, Aperture has lots of tools, but I wouldn't straighten this one.
There are a few pics that become boring and ordinary when you straighten them (too much), because the pic loses its dynamics.

[Oisín]

One more



(I’ve critiqued lots more than I’ve posted, so I’m sort of ‘cashing in’ now, re-establishing a bit of balance)

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Yes, Aperture has lots of tools, but I wouldn't straighten this one.
There are a few pics that become boring and ordinary when you straighten them (too much), because the pic loses its dynamics.

I can’t figure out if the straightened version is better or worse, but after having stared myself half blind at them in rapid pendular succession, I think I’ve come to the same conclusion as you, that the straightened version looks ‘dead’ compared to the original.

[Mastrap]

[OreoCookie]

If you are interested in anything remotely color accurate, you need to get a hardware calibration tool. It was the best investment for my new camera and the difference between my uncalibrated profile and the hardware calibrated profile was particularly noticeable with skin tones.

Especially if you have many different skin colors in your picture. I shot a wedding last November and among the guests where pasty-faced whites (like yours, sincerely), Japanese (more whitish Asian), Vietnamese (the bride's parents are from Vietnam), blacks and Indians. Since not all people were in all shots and the light in the church was very different from the light in the museum where the wedding reception was held, I had a very hard time getting all the skin tones right. Imagine three pictures on a double page: on the left, the bride (Vietnamese descent) and groom (English), on the top right, his family, bottom right, her family -- and I want to get all skin tones right! Ugh. I doubt anybody else would have noticed the work I put into it, but it was important to me.

So if you like photography, you need to get a hardware calibration tool. They've been discussed here, but the recap is: even if you are not willing to spend $200 on a hardware calibration tool, even for $60-70, you can get one which is a huge improvement.

[Rampant1]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

And –


What did you do to this poor kid’s arm?!?

The kid is very bendable; shoulders, elbows and wrists. Can do that thing with his hands hooked together behind his back and rotate them to his front side without unlocking — it's a little unnerving to watch that move.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Yes, Aperture has lots of tools, but I wouldn't straighten this one.
There are a few pics that become boring and ordinary when you straighten them (too much), because the pic loses its dynamics.

Count me in on that opinion. This shot would lose some of its "oomph" if it were straightened. Really, really cool shot.

[Oisín]

What makes you think I'm not a burly black man? Or even a sexy silky dark lady?

I think he meant “like yours truly”, i.e., himself.

[Oisín]

It's rather raw for commercial

Not sure what this means..?

It was basically a snapshot, taken halfway down the escalators going into the metro station, that turned out nice.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

What makes you think I'm not a burly black man? Or even a sexy silky dark lady?

I was referring to myself (think end of a letter) … and boy, am I pale.

[packet of krisps]

Originally Posted by Mastrap 

Very nice, I like photos that change the way people look at everyday things.