1st Model Shoot...pics #2

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.

Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.

Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.

Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

1st Model Shoot...pics #2

Postby !~DeViNe~DaRkNeSs~! on Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:32 pm

hi guys, by popular demand ;) and no annoying copyrights here are sum more for u to examine :)
these i adjusted VERY quickly in PP in u guessed it..JPEG format :?
hopefully they arent too big :oops:
Image
Image
same photo no copyright covering...
Image
Image
Image
Canon EOS 40D
Canon EOS 400D
50mm 1.8 EF
User avatar
!~DeViNe~DaRkNeSs~!
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Essendon - MELBOURNE

Postby mattyjacobs on Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:39 pm

#4 is a really wierd pose.

And I think there's a forum rule about limiting it to 4 images per thread, for the dialup/limited download people. Just a friendly reminder!
User avatar
mattyjacobs
Member
 
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 2:54 pm
Location: Epping, Sydney

Postby beetleboy on Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:44 pm

Add some contrast to make your pastey-black black (the white point is pretty good) and you'll be good to go!

Good work buddy! :D
User avatar
beetleboy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 821
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:57 am
Location: Highbury, Adelaide

Postby Alex on Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:49 pm

Pose and composition wise, I like No 3 and 1. No 4 looks very uncomfortable and unnatural to me. They also look a tad underexposed to me.

Great work though.

Alex
User avatar
Alex
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3465
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 6:14 pm
Location: Melbourne - Nikon

Postby wendellt on Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:50 pm

the first dress is really nice

as for the first and last her right eye looks dark for this type of glamour shot it's best to position the lights in a way so you get a catch light reflection in both eyes

you had 3 at your disposal so one of them should be used as a catch light


white balance on third is better but it now lacks contrast
just fix up the highlight and shadow tones and you'll have a pretty sexy shot

also some look blurry is this due to your harsh jpeging or have you misfocused, what shutter settrings were you using?
most shots look like the poses were pretty static so you shouldn't of had focus issues

also wondering since you used 3 lights all images look underexposed you must of been using high f stops or shutterspeed or your lighting was turned down really low, or you have intentionally made them darker in post, out of intrest whats going on there?

very good for your first try, keep at it
User avatar
wendellt
Outstanding Member of the year (Don't try this at home.)
 
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:04 am
Location: Dilettante Outside the City Walls, Sydney

Postby PiroStitch on Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:10 pm

i really like some of the poses but have to echo Wendell's points about blurring of images. Is it misfocussed or just jpeg crapness?
Hassy, Leica, Nikon, iPhone
Come follow the rabbit hole...
User avatar
PiroStitch
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:08 am
Location: Hong Kong

Postby !~DeViNe~DaRkNeSs~! on Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:17 pm

wendellt wrote:the first dress is really nice

as for the first and last her right eye looks dark for this type of glamour shot it's best to position the lights in a way so you get a catch light reflection in both eyes

also some look blurry is this due to your harsh jpeging or have you misfocused, what shutter settrings were you using?
most shots look like the poses were pretty static so you shouldn't of had focus issues

also wondering since you used 3 lights all images look underexposed you must of been using high f stops or shutterspeed or your lighting was turned down really low, or you have intentionally made them darker in post, out of intrest whats going on there?

very good for your first try, keep at it


lol i wish u didnt point me to her dark eye lol its driving me nuts now!! haha

Yes i got a few blurry shots as my shutter speed was wayyy low, i was shooting around 1/25-1/100 as MAX and mins for my f4.5 18-55 lens and iso at 100/200 for using flash and 800 without :( ....it was REALLY struggling! when i slapped on the 50mm f1.8 i could raise to almost 1/200 with no real probs and this was 200/400 iso.... i seemed over the day to be getting one blurry, one fine and one with a dud WB out of every 10 shots....i did sus this out slowly and due to the volume of shots i took it didnt make a major difference in the long run, maybe helped by cutting the amount of keepers down to 200-300 instead of 500+ :oops:
i think i DESPERATELY need a 50mm before my next shoot, as i say im in love with it, even with just the model lamps on i took sum excellent shots, especially of the bridal set!
hmm so ppl arent keen on pose 4 huh...i thought it was a great pose to emphisise her make-up......man i never realised how long that stuff takes! the girls arrived at 10am and the last one left at 6pm!! it was CRAZY! but well, well, well, well Worth it! :D Angie as a model is AMAZING huh! i dont think there would be a girl that would suit someone's first shoot better! She is on fire..... The other girls of course were excellent too but Angie REALLY stood out and knew her stuff fantastically!

should i mention now that over the day my Mrs was VERY close to me at ALL times, shedding tears occasionally and highly upset :twisted: hehe i dont know how she is going to handle me doing this every now and then...think i care lol :twisted:

oh maybe i should answer.... the focus yes is out alittle, noticeable in the hair mainly and a TINY bit on the edge of the face......JPG crappyness is a large contributer as well
i honestly had my sharpness turned down alittle during the first parts just because i was worried about flaws in the makeup/natural skin flaws etc
so alittle from column A and alittle from column B :roll:
Canon EOS 40D
Canon EOS 400D
50mm 1.8 EF
User avatar
!~DeViNe~DaRkNeSs~!
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Essendon - MELBOURNE

Postby wendellt on Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:34 pm

i think its important at this stage to study your current technique andpolish it up or yul lbe making the same mistakes for a long time

first of al most studio work with the assistance of 1 light or even 2 at nominal output
requires a shutter of 1/125 or 1/1250 fstops arent an issue really unles you want dof effects like image 4
but usually depth of field shoud be set to f5 to f8 or more

if you get a light meter that will tell you what to do essentially

slso i find it weird you would need 2 studio strobes and a flash unit to accomplish most of these shots

where you have admitted that some were kind of available light shots

one way to learn is to use 1 light see what kind of exposures you get with a set reference 1/125 f8 ISO100 and then work up from there

dont compromise on shutter speed for studio work 1/125 minimum
compromise the f stops or changign power output of lights and positioning

anyway theres heaps to it but basically start basic then work your way up

but i admire your goign full on with these just doing what you do and experimenting thats good some people are afraid to 'just do it' thats how you learn

sometimes we all get too technical and we dont do anything
User avatar
wendellt
Outstanding Member of the year (Don't try this at home.)
 
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:04 am
Location: Dilettante Outside the City Walls, Sydney

Postby wendellt on Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:38 pm

yoiur choice of the 50mm is good too no distortion at 50mm good for fashion
User avatar
wendellt
Outstanding Member of the year (Don't try this at home.)
 
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:04 am
Location: Dilettante Outside the City Walls, Sydney

Postby Yi-P on Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:46 pm

Im not very sure why you are getting these underexposures with the strobes. I have the same setup as you do and from my tests, 1/250 @ f/5.6 (+1EV overexposed) I only need a 1/4 + 1/8 from both strobes output bounced back from the umbrellas.


Also, your white balance appears to be on the warmer side of the comfort area, consider tweaking a little bit of the WB?
User avatar
Yi-P
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3579
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:12 am
Location: Sydney -- Ashfield

Postby Oz_Beachside on Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:28 pm

i like the shallow DOF in the last one, but maybe just crop the legs out.

Her posing is great, and provides a lot of variation.

In my first few studio shoots, I had my lights far too far away from the models, for the lighting I wanted. As wendellt said, experiment. I suffer from not moving my lights enough, and I get 300 good shots, but the lighting is so consistent, that the variation gets boring.

I like to bring a soft box in about 1 foot from the model, very different contours to 6 feet away.

Angie doesnt need the bling either. I like shots with less jewelry, and "create" the jewelry by creating catchlights in the eyes, and shine on the lip gloss.

Nice results.
User avatar
Oz_Beachside
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Black Rock, Victoria. D200


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques