Second Look at Brittany

Bilsen

Casual dress fashion look from this model with the hypnotic eyes.

Click the first image for her full gallery.



2.


3.


4.


5.


6.

Bilsen

WOW.

A shutout on both this set AND her bikini set.

Are they that perfect or that horrible?????

Foques

I think our male population is just speechless, man.. Love the work. 4 and 5.. wow.. gorgeous.

zoomer

3 is a nice shot, playful and sexy. Not loving the hand position on the face but can live with it.
2 4 5 all have that model waiting for the camera to go off look, locked into the camera.
She looks really good in 6, like the pose and she looks relaxed and having fun.
Thing to work on, separation from the background, shorter depth of field.

These aren't perfect or horrible. Not a bed set overall. The settings and light management you chose with these are definitely an improvement.

Foques

Zoomer, which f stop should have been this shot at?
f/3.2?

i'm not calling out.. i'm learning..

Bilsen

Thanks guys.

Foques - Zoomer, Divamum and many others here are HUGE fans of bokeh and they are correct much more often than not. I value every comment they make even when I don't agree. I think they'd be looking for 2.8 and wider all the way down to 1.4.

With that said, I wasn't going for bokeh here so much as contrasting textures (hence the wood and stone). Also, the log bench was not movable so there was no way to move Brittany away from the stone wall. With her so close to the stone, a wide Av would not have been a good bokeh, merely an out of focus image.

Yaflyyadie

Number 4 and number 6 are my preferred ones.
Just the eye expression make a statement.
It goes from a very inquisitive look to such a candid shot.
WOW, great pictures.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!beer

zoomer

For the sake of discussion and because I was asked....would have shot these wall photos from an angle at 2.8 or 1.8 so there be out of focus areas in front and behind the subject with the face and hair being in the plane of sharp focus. Probably would have shot her sitting up or standing.
For me...I always look for backgrounds that will not compete for attention with the subject. Look for angles...in posing and in backgrounds.
No I don't think my way is the only way .

Imagine if she had the same pose but was on the ground 6 feet from the wall and shot with the 50 at 1.4 from ground level. She would be in focus and the wall would be nicely blurred in the background, it would be a completely different looking shot.

We all see things differently. From time to time I see a photographers work that makes me want to throw my cameras out the window....because they see things in a way I know I never will.

Foques

Zoomer, with shooting in 2.8 or less, wouldn't you have part of her hair/ face OOF?

John, sorry to hijack your thread, bit i'm genuinely curious.

zoomer

Not unless you are just a few feet away....and it wouldn't matter if it was....as long as the eyes are sharp.

Bilsen

Foques, as long as we're on the topic it's never a hijack. These are learning threads and not just for me. Keep the questions coming.

One of the reasons I've become a rabid Zoomer fan is that he has very strong views of what he likes but understands that there are other views.

He is dead right about moving her away from the BKG and shooting f1.8, but he doesn't get huffy when I say that's not what I was looking for here. I actively wanted the textures and the wood bench in the image so, in this respect, it wasn't a "mistake". It just did not produce a pleasing image for Zoomer. Chacun au son gout.

If you go to Brittany's first look, you'll see I did a LOT of "Zoomer/DivaMum" bokeh. I learn from everything he says such that, if I had decided to go for bokeh in these frames, he would have taught me how to get it.

divamum

Good grief - when did I suddenly become a paradigm?!

Been busy, John - simply no time to respond in depth.

Foques, for me, as long as the eyes are sharp (and sometimes even only ONE of the eyes), I personally don't necessarily care if everything else is. It all depends on the look and the tog's preference. I'm a big fan of shallow DOF (hence my fascination with Tilt Shift and my Lensbaby, and my secret lust for an 85 1.2!!!)- it's the thing that most drew me to portraiture, actually, as I always liked the look when I saw others doing it and was determined to learn how. Other people may want a deeper DOF for all sorts of reasons, including they just like that sharp-edged look better.

I actually like this set the best of the three - part of that is probably because I'm not a guy so all the extra skin has no effect on me at all, but mainly because I think you're getting more natural looks from her, espeically in #6 where I'm seeing less "pouty model" and more "really pretty young woman".

Of this set, I like 1/3/6.

I think of the recent models you've shared, Miss Britt has the best style sense of what works for her. akeup and style don't compete, and for the most part I'm looking at *her* rather than the outfits. I don't particularly care for the dress+boots combo, but that's personal taste and it didn't prompt, "Honey WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?!?!" I think you need to tell these girls to find and/or talk to their Gay Boyfriends* before the shoot to help pick their clothes, or even bring them along as stylists )

If you want to use texture, think about why you want it, and what it will do to the shot, not just "texture". Does it contrast something, enhance something? I tend to always want textures a little bit blurred out, so I probably would have adopted a similar approach to Zoomer's, even if it meant I was doing 3/4 rather than full-length shots.

*Lest anybody jump down my throat, this is a widely-used, afffectionate and entirely NON-offensive term in Operland. Not sure if it's used in general vernacular, hence this disclaimer/explanation!!! )

Bilsen

Diva you are too much.

I wanted the texture as a counterpoint to the smooth skin/smooth dress. I also just liked the look of the wood bench, knotholes and all. We're just gonna have to disagree on this one but I still you.

As for wardrobe, I actually agree about the boots BUT wardrobe is up to models and I'm neither gay (not that there's anything wrong with that - see Jerry Seinfeld ) nor anywhere near a 20 something, so I cannot help them in matters of current style.

Foques

I think this is a bright example of to each their own

I LOVE the boots in this context. Gives me an impression of the farmers daughter, somewhere in the south..
Though, if that's not exactly the look she was going for, then, I concur.

Thank you very much for the expanded explanations, all of you! Seeing as I'm still trying to figure out the people shooting style it is incredibly useful to me. Normally, i'd agree with Divamum and Zoomer about the shallow DOF as that is what I prefer. in this set, though, I think sharp Bg works wonderfully

divamum

~lightbulb~

I think I've figured out why the texture on this occasion didn't quite make sense to me: I love the stone wall behind her, which is a cool colour that picks up on the cool tones in the dress and the blues in her eyes. The warmer wood of the bench goes against all the "cools".

I'm probably overthinking it (Me... overthink?!?!), but since we're having a good old natter here, thought I'd throw that out for good measure.

I'm obviously in the minority over the boots which is fair enough - as I say, personal taste! It's all good

Bilsen

divamum wrote: »

~lightbulb~

I think I've figured out why the texture on this occasion didn't quite make sense to me: I love the stone wall behind her, which is a cool colour that picks up on the cool tones in the dress and the blues in her eyes. The warmer wood of the bench goes against all the "cools".

I'm probably overthinking it (Me... overthink?!?!), but since we're having a good old natter here, thought I'd throw that out for good measure.

I'm obviously in the minority over the boots which is fair enough - as I say, personal taste! It's all good

Diva - EXACTLY RIGHT. Point/Counterpoint. (are you old enough to remember "Shana you ignorant slut" from Saturday Night Live)?? NOT you, just the point/counterpoint satire.

I actually agree with you about the boots but I find if the model isn't happy, neither am I.

Hackbone

John, for me it seems as if your working too hard to pose her in a sexy fashion. The posing seems to be very stiff and restricted instead of flowing.
When posing the female form you are generally supposed to show an S curve with the body. This shows feminity and softness. Most of these are straight line or angular which comes off as harsh or stiff. The viewers eye doesn't flow but jumps to follow all the angles.
She seems to be working hard to hike her dress up or cover up areas that shouldn't show instead of playing with the camera.

I hope this makes sense.....your processing and technique is fantastic but the posing is stiff. Check out Larry Peters Photography, Don Chick, Momento photography and study the females shown there.

Bilsen

Will do Charles.

I don't see the stiffness but maybe after checking out those guys, I will.

zoomer

John I am attaching a gallery of a girl that really knew how to get the curve in there. She goes a bit far in some of these....I like far . Stiffness and angles in posing seem to keep coming up a lot.
This girl started out very stiff and shy. I knew she had it in there somewhere cause messing around she would hit these crazy poses....once she loosened up and just let if flow, she kind of got into this slow dance mode which worked great. I didn't pose any of these, I just let her go and clicked the shutter from time to time.....anyway this is the opposite of stiff.
http://alloutdoor.smugmug.com/Bridal-galleries/Kathy/10002064_Pnget#726204291_gWCxh

Bilsen

Thanks Zoomer.

I see what you're saying and I will incorporate the hip bump and back bend into my sessions. Maybe I'll bring some music to have them dance a bit.

BTW, Charlie's senior set is also terrific.

Foques

God, do I love this forum or what!

Yet again, reminds me why I come here daily instead of many other ones. Pro's, Amateurs, Students and teachers are sharing their thoughts and not getting butt hurt. you all! (Diva and zoomer especially, lol)

thank you for the pointers.