My first time with Stephanie C&C pls

PuppY_K1ck3R

Here are a few from this weekends session. C&C away.

1

2

3

4

marikris

#1 has amazing colors. Love the vibrancy of the green + red. #4 is awesome too, great skin and her makeup is fantastic. I kind of wish the rope wasn't the main focus, but it still works. #2-3 I wish more of her face was in focus, and the lighting more on her face in #3 so the interest is not honed into the broad/boxy white of her coat.

Did you use a gel on the first one? I want to experiment with gels so bad on my 580EX lol.

PuppY_K1ck3R

marikris wrote:

#1 has amazing colors. Love the vibrancy of the green + red. #4 is awesome too, great skin and her makeup is fantastic. I kind of wish the rope wasn't the main focus, but it still works. #2-3 I wish more of her face was in focus, and the lighting more on her face in #3 so the interest is not honed into the broad/boxy white of her coat.

Did you use a gel on the first one? I want to experiment with gels so bad on my 580EX lol.

Well thank u for your critique. #2 its a result of skin smoothing. Yea i have to find a new technique. And #1 is with a gel.

Zarathustra

with marikris. Numbers 1 and 4 are incredibly well done! The only thing that distracts me in number 1 is the black line where the wall/backdrop hits the floor. All in all, it looks like you had a great time and made some wonderful pictures.

Hackbone

I especially like 1 & 2. 1 has great lighting but too much visual stuff going on and confuses me as to where to look. But dang right on with the light.

2 I like alot good stuff going on. The offset hand placement and short lighting on the face is really nice. Don't like the spot of eye makeup coming out from the side of her right eye.

Ed911

I'm a number 4 fan...nicely done.

Nikolai

Congrats on your first time!

1. Good idea with the green stuff. However, the implementation is not onpar with it. Uber bgright/saturated bg draws first part of my attention. Then my eyes involuntarily slide to the red bag and finally end up on the red boot. The model performs a very slight role here. Aslo, upper half of the frame (with it's studio like bg and only green color) cries "commercial", while the lower part (with the non-covered plastic floor and non-matching pants) cries snapshot.

2.Good upper body shot. I take it, one umbrella and a reflector? Crop seems just a bit too tight on the right. Also, pose and facial expression seem to be half baked, it's neither "high fashion" nor "casual". Other reviewer already noticed plasticky skin..

3. Lighting problem: her face is way underlit. Chopped off elbow. Similar "not there yet" pose/expression.

4. Technically best of all four. Plastiky skin again. Watch the hair. As in all four images I don't think the focal length is long enough.
My biggest grudge with this one is I have no clue why a sad pretty girl in a corset and a studio environment is holding, of all things, a noose...

All in all, nice start, keep shooting! :-)

PuppY_K1ck3R

Nikolai wrote:

Congrats on your first time!

1. Good idea with the green stuff. However, the implementation is not onpar with it. Uber bgright/saturated bg draws first part of my attention. Then my eyes involuntarily slide to the red bag and finally end up on the red boot. The model performs a very slight role here. Aslo, upper half of the frame (with it's studio like bg and only green color) cries "commercial", while the lower part (with the non-covered plastic floor and non-matching pants) cries snapshot.

2.Good upper body shot. I take it, one umbrella and a reflector? Crop seems just a bit too tight on the right. Also, pose and facial expression seem to be half baked, it's neither "high fashion" nor "casual". Other reviewer already noticed plasticky skin..

3. Lighting problem: her face is way underlit. Chopped off elbow. Similar "not there yet" pose/expression.

4. Technically best of all four. Plastiky skin again. Watch the hair. As in all four images I don't think the focal length is long enough.
My biggest grudge with this one is I have no clue why a sad pretty girl in a corset and a studio environment is holding, of all things, a noose...

All in all, nice start, keep shooting! :-)

I appreciate your criticsm. This shoot was a joint effort between a couple friends and I. We have learned alot from this shoot and also noticed simple mistakes we have done.

1. We screwed up on the seamless paper. We did not have enough to pull and cover the floor.

2. Is my favorite but i guess people have a problem with my skin smoothing. Right now im in the proccess of trying/finding a new technique.

4. Could you pls. explain to me why you think the focal length isnt long enough? I was shooting shooting 35mm-60mm with the DX crop. Also I was using a 24-70mm 2.8 if that matters.

Thank you very much for the honest critique.

Nikolai

PuppY_K1ck3R wrote:

4. Could you pls. explain to me why you think the focal length isnt long enough? I was shooting shooting 35mm-60mm with the DX crop. Also I was using a 24-70mm 2.8 if that matters.

That's what I thought... 50mm range is OK if you shoot full frame (FF) body. On a crop body the minimal focal length should be 70 (85 better). That's just the way human eye works. Anything shorter and the facial and body features become noticeably distorted. Sometimes you actually want this "for the effect", but more often than not it's a sideeffect of being limited in space, hence shooting too close, hence the typical wide-angle (WA) distortion.
I used to be guilty of the same sin originally, until some wise people (hi Kathy:-) pointed it out. I started to shoot with a longer glass, noticed the difference and actually became very sensitive to the WA effect.

PuppY_K1ck3R

Nikolai wrote:

That's what I thought... 50mm range is OK if you shoot full frame (FF) body. On a crop body the minimal focal length should be 70 (85 better). That's just the way human eye works. Anything shorter and the facial and body features become noticeably distorted. Sometimes you actually want this "for the effect", but more often than not it's a sideeffect of being limited in space, hence shooting too close, hence the typical wide-angle (WA) distortion.
I used to be guilty of the same sin originally, until some wise people (hi Kathy:-) pointed it out. I started to shoot with a longer glass, noticed the difference and actually became very sensitive to the WA effect.

Ok I gotcha on the focal length. BUt, on a crop sensor, wouldn't a focal length of 50mm equate to 75mm. For instance shot number 2 was taken at a focal length of 48mm but the focal length on an FX sensor would make it 72mm. So a crop sensor would actually need a shorter focal length compared to an FX sensor.

Nikolai

PuppY_K1ck3R wrote:

Ok I gotcha on the focal length. BUt, on a crop sensor, wouldn't a focal length of 50mm equate to 75mm. For instance shot number 2 was taken at a focal length of 48mm but the focal length on an FX sensor would make it 72mm. So a crop sensor would actually need a shorter focal length compared to an FX sensor.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. Optical distortion doesn't depend on the crop, it just makes image smaller. So if you want to produce an analogue of the FF frame you have to have a longer focal length.
And 50mm is a bare min for portrait, longer one is typycally preferred. Whenever I have enough distance to put between my camera and my subject I'm using 70-200/2.8 on my 5D2 FF body, usually at 100..140mm.

Photosbychuck

Nice shots for first time with new model.
I like the lighting in #4 but not crazy about the noose either.
Where you trying to do a suicide theme shot in #4?

Take Care,
Chuck

PuppY_K1ck3R

Photosbychuck wrote:

Nice shots for first time with new model.
I like the lighting in #4 but not crazy about the noose either.
Where you trying to do a suicide theme shot in #4?

Take Care,
Chuck

The noose was the idea of her friend who was directing the shot for that outfit. The goal was to make people feel uneasy.