Senior Surprise

Darren Troy C

The "surprise" will come after a few comments, if you all don't mind. I'm pretty anxious to uncover the "truth" about the young man in the photographs. His name is Serious Drake (kidding of course but boy did he come across as all business) and I guess I would have to consider this my inaugural segway into the "Senior" setting. I should have had the flash for the hair-in-the-eyes shadows but we worked with what we had...or didn't have for that matter.

1. (this one turned out kind of weird -he liked it- so who was I to argue?) :rofl



2.



3.



4. (holy crap - he does smile! - sort of )



5.



6.



7.



8. (He wanted Dad in on this one - a bit high-key but I believe it works for this one.)

Flutist

Alright well I'll take the number 1 spot for comments!!!

Darren Troy C

...and that comment would be.....?

du8die

Not bad. Fill would have helped a lot here.

#1) I think a slightly tighter crop would be helpful. The khaki fold on his leg is distracting. If you could crop that out, it would be better.

#2) I guess I don't get the fade-to-brown in the lower right corner. It draws my attention to --- a wall.

#3) Nice. Again, a slightly tighter crop. Maybe keep everything above the belt line. I like the lines.

#4) I like the color. Not sure if I'm thrilled about the looking up at him camera angle. I think this would work well as a square crop.

#5, #6) Fill, Fill, Fill.

#7) Fill. I'm not sure the B/W conversion works here. Result is a white building with light b/w clothes and subject. Not enough contrast for this to work well.

#8) I think I would like to see the father's face, but this is a nice tender moment. The high-key doesn't but me too much.

A few general thoughts:

Crop: I'm wondering about your choice of crop (framing) for most of these. You typically crop a bit below the belt. In the case of these photos, it introduces a whole new element to your photos, but then it gets chopped off. My personal rule of thumb, if I show anything below the belt, I tend to go full body, if it's a head shot, above the waist only. But, that's just me. These just seem kind of awkward.

He's probably not smiling because of the braces. I had a kid who would smile like crazy when you were talking to him, but pre-focus a camera... gone. Then I realized, it was the braces, stupid. He's probably self-conscious about 'em. I'd like to figure out a way to tactfully say "don't worry about the braces, dude. That's what Photoshop is for."

Thanks for posting. Well done. I hope my nits were helpful.

jeffreaux2

Just for citiques sake on the set as a whole ....

The compositions find your subject mostly centered. Using the rule of thirds, or golden mean would make them look more dynamic....and add interest for the viewer.

Shooting from a low vantage point up towards a face is seldom flattering. Not that it cant be done...for varieties sake, but nearly ALL of these use that angle. Even the full length shots find the camera located too low in my opinion. The low angles....like these.... will make the lower part of the body appear larger than it actually is. Not flattering at all in that regard.

The cropping....
I agree with the previous post about just below the waist being an odd place to make the cut. A tad higher would be better for a 1/2 body composition. I do a lot of 3/4 length poses for seniors. In these I typically crop a few inches above the knee. Full length photos display poorly on wallet sized prints. For this reason, I usually shoot less full length shots for seniors.

Flash for fill......or....why not get onto the shady side of those buildings?

Posing......4 of the 8 you shared have him posed with his arms crossed. While it's good to give folks something to do with their hands, crossed arms is a general no-no in portraiture. I have seen very few crossed armed portraits where it didn't make the subject appear defensive. It should be avoided as a pose.....as with hands stuffed in pockets....and hands balled into fists.

Flutist

Idlewild wrote:

...and that comment would be.....?

didn't really have one, just hoped it would spark others so we could get the answer

Darren Troy C

Thanks guys! "People" are not a game I have cared to venture into until coming aboard here. See what yall have done to me!

Anyway, the surprise is this fella is..............


12!

Good Lord Almighty what has happened to "kids" nowadays?????!!!!!

Again, thanks for the input.....all very helpful!

Trevlan

Idlewild wrote:

Thanks guys! "People" are not a game I have cared to venture into until coming aboard here. See what yall have done to me!

Anyway, the surprise is this fella is..............


12!

Good Lord Almighty what has happened to "kids" nowadays?????!!!!!

Again, thanks for the input.....all very helpful!

I'm not surprised at all. My best friend's son is 11 and he's 5'9". WTF! I'm a virtual midget. :-(