Actor Headshots

briandelion · January 4, 2011

This is my first venture into the realm of actor portfolio shots. These are representative of the kinds of shots I took and I wanted to get some feedback. I will be doing a second session so this will give me the opportunity to improve on what I already have. I'm hoping you can give me some good old c&c.
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Icebear · January 4, 2011

I don't know from headshots, but I really like #5.

Foques · January 4, 2011

now, it's a subjective opinion here.. but I think he needs different poses. In the close ups, he looks like images were taken with a fish eye lens..
#5 is definitely good, but the other shots i'm not a fan of.
Just a thought, if he was looking directly at you or looking down at you, his facial structure would seem different.

take it for what it's worth, though..

divamum · January 4, 2011

You're off to a good start!

1. I like this shot - I think it's one of the best of the set. I think you can go further with processing and bump up the contrast in general, while equalizing the contrast between the two sides of his face; also the catchlight in the camera right eye almost burns out into the actual white of his eye - should be easy to fix with some dodging and burning. If the tilt was done in post, I'd probably ease off on it ever so sligthly - it's just a tiny bit too much for my taste, but that is a matter of taste. The bg works well for you in this one, although if you straighten it up to the right (CW) you can lose those two highlights which compete with his face a tiny bit too much.

2. This one doesn't work so well for me - his expression isn't particularly alive (or intense), and the strong diagonal in the bg cuts his face on the lh side. I do like the colour/contrast in his eyes, though - process #1 like that and it will be terrific.

3/4 - 4 is the clear winner for me here, and my other favorite of the set. I like the intensity of expression, the angle is far more flattering than in 3, and he's well connected with the camera/viewer. I don't like the crease in his jacket on camera right, and I want a bit more detail in his face on camera left (not sure if that highlight on his forehead is blown or not - even if it is, you can possibly fix it with some sheer cloning work) - I think you can fix those in post with a bit of work.

5. Lighting and expression are great in this one - probably the best expression from him - but the bg as it is kills it for me. Unlike the first one, th ebg is distracting in this one, especially with the frame chopping through his head. HOWEVER: what happens if you crop closer, losing the diagonal on the left, and the frame above? You'll get just the plain background and I think it could work really well. It'll look less "location", but the natlight effect is still compelling even if the bg looks plain. It's a great shot of the guy and would be a shame not to use it.

6 might be saveable with a closer crop, but I'm not sure it "says" anything about him as a performer - I don't get a person in this one, but a picture, if that makes sense.

7/8 BG is competing way too much for my taste. I don't have a problem with a blurred- out something behind, but in these it's a LOT of something and I'm trying to figure out what's on the shelves, is that a workshop behind a stage etc etc. Too much going on. Also, in 8 there's a bad shadow behind him. The idea behind these was good and the pose isn't bad, but the stuff around it takes attention off the actor. Try close-cropping and see if they work that way - never hurts to try a bunch of different crops

I think in general you're on the right track. I'd like to see more spontaneous personality emerging, but you got that in a couple of them. It's the toughest thing, IMO, especially when people know the shots are "rpofessional" and "important". Talk, talk, talk, shoot outtakes (I've grabbed a couple of decent ones) and keep reminding them to work the camera. One thing to consider for an actor used to stage is that being on stage is a triangle with the performer at the apex; being photographed (or filming) is the other way round, with the apex at the lens. It's a HUGE difference in technique. I can't claim to have mastered this yet in my own shoots although it's what I strive for - I keep working at figuring out how to get my subects to really connect and to display the personality they need to cross the casting agent's desk. Work in progress!

Look forward to seeing the next round you do

reyvee61 · January 5, 2011

Wow...all I can say is great job!
I'm not an expert either but I know great shots when I see them.
Four is my fave....

briandelion · January 5, 2011

Thanks, Icebear & Rey for the encouraging words.
Foques: This guy is challenging. He has a very elongated nose and an almond shaped head. Hard to get a flattering angle. Interesting face but challenging. I'll keep experimenting with different vantage points.

briandelion · January 5, 2011

Divamum: thanks so much for taking the time to give such an in-depth analysis. Some excellent ideas contained within!

It's funny what you mentioned about #1. I did two versions, each with a different raw conversion program. I liked the overall look of this one better, but I rotated it just a pinch more than the first and didn't like it as much. I convinced myself I was being too picky, but there you go!
You made some great observations and I will put them all to the test.

By the way, that room is a workshop in the art building (for puppetry of all things.) When I chimped the images the background didn't look as distracting as it did when I brought them up in full view on my monitor. I had the aperture at f/2.2 on those. I tried darkening areas in pp but it just didn't sit right with me. I should have had him further from that distracting background or went for headshots only in that room.

Live and learn. I'm glad I'll have another go at these and will post in the coming weeks. Thanks again for your feedback. Some real nuggets of wisdom to feast upon! :eat

Foques · January 5, 2011

briandelion wrote: »

Foques: This guy is challenging. He has a very elongated nose and an almond shaped head. Hard to get a flattering angle. Interesting face but challenging. I'll keep experimenting with different vantage points.

Please, don't take it as I was bashing you!
I think you did well (love how sharp and exposed shots are), it's his physique that makes me scratch my head.

I can't really think of any other vantage points (except the ones i've suggested, and the ones you've tried. the latter ones would be my first choice as well)

Hackbone · January 5, 2011

You have some great ideas and lighting here, congrats. Only nit is I would have used a longer lens. Seems his face is distored in many. What lens did you use, if a zoom what mm.

briandelion · January 5, 2011

Hackbone wrote: »

You have some great ideas and lighting here, congrats. Only nit is I would have used a longer lens. Seems his face is distored in many. What lens did you use, if a zoom what mm.

This has me puzzled because it's the same lens I use for most portraits I've posted here. It's a Olympus Zuiko 50mm f.2 prime lens. With the 4/3rds system it's about 100mm equivalent. It's supposed to be a great lens for portraits.

I commented above that the model has a strange facial structure (very long fairly prominent nose and small almond shaped head.) Did you ever encounter anything like this?

Some of these were rotated and cropped so they were not as close up as they appear. Is there anything you can think of besides my possible ineptitude that could have caused this?

Maybe I'll try my 40-150 which also works nicely for portraits but doesn't gather as much light.

Icebear · January 5, 2011

I was one who commented on your other thread, where you posted some more dramatic lighting shots of this man. I think I was interpreting his natural facial structure as distortion from using too short a lens for close-up portraits. I wouldn't worry about it. Given the body you're using, the 50mm should be pleasing. It's his head, not your lens. Not trying to hijack your thread, but this photo shows what I thought I was seeing, and I'll bet it's what other folks are commenting on too. Believe me, this woman does NOT look like this. This results from using a 50mm lens on a ff body close-up.

Qarik · January 5, 2011

nice work..I was gonna say that his face/head is just different..not distorted. If you look at the upper body shots vs close ups..I don't see much distortion in the closeups.

briandelion · January 6, 2011

Thanks, guys. That puts my mind at ease. :whew I will use both lenses in the next session though just for comparison and to see if the telephoto is more flattering.

Actor Headshots

Comments