Album Cover
jmphotocraft
Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
My first band shoot. Just going through the shots now, got excited about this one. More later if anyone's interested.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
0
Comments
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
The remedy should be, get it right in camera, use Lightroom/Photoshop/etc to enhance the final product.
To me, the image could have been shot much better. The first thing that stands out is the back guy in the middle is clearly OOF. Also, the exposures are not even across the subjects. The back guy is underexposed, front guy very side lit (which isn't necessarily bad) and then the other two are somewhere in between. With the front guy being very side lit and the others appearing more front lit - it doesn't produce harmony in the image. The scene doesn't really work for me and the horizon is running thru their heads.
Groups are tough, no doubt. Many times, when you are spreading the group out like you did here, you may have to light each person separately. Also, make sure you're using a long enough DOF to get them in focus. It also helps to understand when selecting who to focus on, you have twice as much in focus room behind your focal point as you do in front of it. For example, if I'm photographing a group of 5 rows, I'm always focusing on someone in row 2, not row 3.
There needs to be more drama in the lighting. Edge lights behind and to the sides of your group would have gone along way to create depth/dimension as well as drama.
ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
please visit: www.babyelephants.net
You couldn't have created a tougher grouping for focus if you'd tried. Assuming you focused on the guy on camera left, and he was eight feet from the camera, at f/5.6 you had less than 3 feet of DOF to work with. No way were you goiong to ge able to get the rearmost guys anywhere close to sharp.
It's water over the dam at this point, but for a group like this, I'd have boosted my ISO so I could have shot at f/11.
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
www.seanmartinphoto.com
__________________________________________________
it's not the size of the lens that matters... It's how you focus it.
aaaaa.... who am I kidding!
whoever dies with the biggest coolest piece of glass, wins!
www.CottageInk.smugmug.com
NIKON D700
The band is choosing the album art. The location was their choice too as it has childhood significance for them. I liked it, and it provided at least 4 good distinct scenes.
Yeah, the image could have been shot better, but hindsight is 20/20. It's different when you're on the scene and it's raining. We were rushed to get through the shoot before everyone looked like drowned rats.
Here are some more examples from the session:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
If the DOF was selected on purpose for the others to not be in focus - then it should have been shallower. As is, the front man is in focus, the next 2 are very close to in focus and the back guy is OOF. It doesn't work.
The location isn't the problem, it's the composition selected.
Many of us have been on the scene of a job when conditions were not ideal. We've photographed more than once in the rain - makes it even more important to know your gear, understanding the exposure triangle, etc.
I won't critique further as instead of taking an opportunity to learn, I read excuses as to why the image fell significantly short.
ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
Your opinion has been noted. It is not shared by the band.
I won't respond further as instead of taking an opportunity to be helpful, I read assertions of superiority.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
I found your last line rude and the whole post comes off as non-constructive. Here's some constructive criticism for you - if you don't want reactions like mine, next time try typing things like "nice first effort. next time try (blank) it will work better to (blank)". There are ways to tell people how they can do better next time without putting them down with negativity.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
1st of all I expected to see a square format image......CD's like vinyl albums use a square format for the front cover and also for the back or inserts, sometimes a rectangular is used for inserts especially if it a foldout "poster".........this is how I would have liked to see it...also in the same size of the cover (4.75 X 4.75" approx ).......with exif attached ........
2- small flash is only making contact with 1 person.....needed fill flash for whole scene and subjects need to be not squinting....fans like to see the eyes......
3 before i do a shoot like this I study the albums of artists of similar genre to the one I will shoot and of similar look as to what aI want to convey to get an idea of lighting and such.....
this pic reminds me of an early to mid career Alabama cover......or a Charlie Daniels cover...just from the posing........It is hard to look at many band pix and tell what genre they are in, but that is ok......
What is the band's name? Just curious.........
Remember to think square and pose and shoot for square....
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
My post was not negative and instead was full of constructive criticisms - you are reading it negatively because you don't like the feedback. Separate yourself from the emotional attachment to the image and look at it objectively. I struggle to do that myself, which is why when it comes to submitting images for print competition, certifications, etc - I always solicit opinions from my peers.
It's great the band liked it - but that does not make it a good album cover or portrait. When I was starting out, I shot images that fell way short and clients liked them. Didn't make them good.
Again, quote the lines from my original response that were inaccurate or rude.
Think I'm a big meany? Sit down with an art director, print competition judge or even a demanding client - I'll look like a decalwed kitten.
ModelMayhem · Flickr· ∞500px
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
I do think the composition overall is good, just needs something to separate them from the background.
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact