DSLR Photography Forum

I'm looking at this image, having had 8 hours sleep.
I'm thinking, "one lamp is too hot, I see a burn on her face, I see multiple foot shadows,
and, I see that expression again".
Now, I'm not really interested in the quality of the "model," no.
I would like SAVAGE and cutting critique of the photography though.

FIRE AWAY! :o

Can only repeat what you said, the right side is much hotter then the other lamps, maybe a denser diffuser? or use a diffuser?

The hotspot on her face does need to be adjusted. For that matter the light is strong throughout the whole right side of the back ground. What are you using for lighting? Please explain your setup.

Excluding the model's arms (too limp) - my main comments would be on the lighting.

The key light seems a little harsh as if it is a direct light rather than diffused by an umbrella/soft box. Also, a greater difference in light supplied by the key and fill lights would add impact to the pose. If the fill light contributes only half or even a quarter as much light to the photo as the key light, the model looks much more dramatic.

Post processing: I would sculpt the model's waistline a bit on both sides to give her a more hourglass figure, and get rid of the folds in her shirt. I have done a 2 minute hack on the easy side of her body to show you what I mean. You could do much better given a little time and effort.

I know lots of people disagree with terra-forming models like this, but it is part of the job if you are doing modeling portfolios...




Show us some more of this session.

Thanks Toad. Very valuable stuff. I shall be more attentive next time I'm in the studio!
Regarding the waist, yes. I think that looks ok, mind ewe, I have 300 shots, so PP-ing may take a while!
I think I'll present the model with contacts of, say 200, and then PP her choices, (assuming there are any), after that. Does that sound realistic?

The lights are 3x Elinchrom 500's with softies. The softies are approx 1 metre square each.
I think I simply misplaced them, leaving the one far too close.

I'll post some more in a few minutes.......Standby!

NP.

Personally, I think 200 is too many to choose from. I would make 4x6 prints of the 30-50 best shots and let her choose from those. Its pretty hard to tell anything from a contact sheet.

What I did is presented maybe 40 4x6 prints to choose from, and I also did 3 examples of post processed photos (knocked out and replaced backgrounds, minor blemish retouching) and showed those side by side with the originals. That gave the model the "idea" of what can be done in pp, without resulting in too much up-front work.

Hint: be damn careful about what you say when you imply you can "correct" issues with her figure...

Lighting is really tricky, and is an art in its own right. Before I did my session, I shot a roll or 2 of test shots with my wife as a stand-in just to get the hang of what works and what doesn't when photographing women.

All noted. Thank you.
It was unfortunate for me, that my first studio time was under these circumstances.
Still, no matter!!!! I'll PP 'em to death!

Here's some more, the last one being a mildly PP'd version.

Right! Good to see more shots. Apologies in advance for any criticisms - but this is the "critiques" section.

Overall my favorite would be the last one because the model has the best expression, and the use of a prop (the chair) gives her something to do with her hands. Good lighting on this one as well - reduced fill light adds drama. (Love that little pink strap too!)

#1 would be a total winner if she had a bit softer expression on her face (really just her mouth - her eyes are good). It is her best choice of costume - highlighting her best features and downplaying her waist. That background will be tricky to pp. For future - this model needs to have something to do with her hands. Where you have posed her with a prop or with hands on hips, she looks more natural and relaxed.

#2 is a super pose and I really like the background - the slightly upwards lighting on her face from the left might be considerd a bit unflattering by purists, but it works great in this context because of the rally background and tough girl expression. Waist scupting required, and also remove small dark line under her right eye. I would mess a bit with the white triangular space where her left arm meets her chest because the folds in her shirt make her look falsely flat-chested there. I think you could fill that white triangle in completely, and it would not look "enhanced".

#3 suffers in comparison with #2 because her right hand is idle, the tie knot covers her navel, and her expression is not focussed. The left hand - thumb in pocket is really good. So is the leaning on one leg - although #2 - where the lean is more pronounced is a better pose.

Well done!

I have never shot a model in a studio, nor anywhere for that matter, so take my comments with a grain or two of salt.

Generally speaking I think your shooting angle was too low. Sometimes this works, but here I think it is not flattering for her. It is best in the chair shot, though possibly slightly high.

Also, in the 1st image, she is very square to the camera. I would try to avoid posing women with their shoulders square to the camera.

I think the 3rd light would have been best used as a hairlight or a background light - something to give better separation between model and bg. A grid and a boom would have been handy; not sure if you had these available.

Toad's comments are great. Love the pink strap too.

Hi guys.

Brilliant! Marvellous! Thanks indeed!
Agree with all points, but a little bemused, (Terriers get bemused, you know), by the angle thing. The camera was meant to be at her eye-level, as I thought that'd be right.
Being a small dog was a slight problem, as the model was a little taller than me, (she's about 5ft .10").
A boom? Yes, what a good idea......... I didnt find one though, unfortunately. A grid?? Hmmm, :/ What's a grid?

I'd post a few variants, but I'm concerned at hogging space, so I may upload to my PBase galleries.

Thanks again, and, if you think of anything else, please let me know.
Aware that I am a novice in the studio area, I'm more than happy to hear any constructive criticism from you.

Rufus Wrote:Agree with all points, but a little bemused, (Terriers get bemused, you know), by the angle thing. The camera was meant to be at her eye-level, as I thought that'd be right.

LOL; maybe I need to adjust my monitor viewing angle?

But what I'm talking about is especially apparent in the shot with the checkered bg; it looks to me as if she's looking down. As you said, it may be her height.

Personally, I think that angle works in that shot. Haughty, tough expression...big attitude...looking down is thr right angle. Just my $.02

IMHO, the angle accentuates her hips and makes her head look small.

HAPPY DOG!

Here is an extract from an e-mail I just recieved from the model.............

....................they are brilliant! thank you

Rufus Wrote:HAPPY DOG!

Here is an extract from an e-mail I just recieved from the model.............

....................they are brilliant! thank you

Woohoo! At the end of the day, that's what matters...

shuttertalk Wrote:Woohoo! At the end of the day, that's what matters...

Exactly!