Nothin Sexy Here but an actual Tearsheet

Bilsen

First: Hope everyone had a great day on what my Choctaw friend calls "Save Whitey's Butt" day.:rofl

SO I'm at dinner on Thanksgiving and I get a text from a close friend who owns a restaurant. A local magazine was in and wants to do a small feature on the place so can I please come down and shoot a lifestyle image for her to give the magazine by tomorrow (today). :huh

Fortunately, I have a model for a daughter in law, so after dinner we go home, grab my gear (she did NOTHING, she looks like that normally) and off we go.

Today the magazine asked for full resolution copies of these two with releases and a usage license.
I KNOW the bkg is sharp. I KNOW there's stuff on the walls. I also know these are gonna be in a publication so I guess we got what they wanted or at least what they'll settle for.

Hint: Always try to have a model with you at family dinners. It can come in darn handy for emergencies. LOL

jonh68

Did you get paid? Get free dinners? That's asking for a bit much on Thanksgiving day. The magazine should have taken care of all this so it wasn't a rush job. I get asked from time to time from magazines would I take pics like this for exposure and I turn them down. They can go get someone else to take advantage of.

In regards to the photo, it's serviceable but the way it is lit takes away from the atmosphere of the place.

Bilsen

I did it as a favor to my friend the owner but even a devout hobbyist such as I has his limits.

I do have a house account there anyway and I won't be able to afford to eat at home for a while plus a (admittedly) small usage fee from the magazine.

As far as the actual images, I can't argue either way since this might have been the second "lifestyle" set I've ever done. I'm glad it wasn't an appendectomy .
However, the friend/client is happy, the publication ain't exactly the New York Times (it's a local weekly) and I made a friend's life a little easier so I'm not gonna argue about technicals. I will, however, be reading up on a new style in the coming months just to have some expansion capability.

jmphotocraft

Nothin Sexy Here but an actual Tearsheet
I agree with John, the lighting removes all intimacy and makes the shot look even more staged than it was.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bilsen

Can't argue, can't change it and can't take it back. It's till gonna be a (minor) published piece.

How many times have we all seen an image in a publication that would get torn to shreds here? I see at least 3 a week.

jonh68

Bilsen wrote: »

I did it as a favor to my friend the owner but even a devout hobbyist such as I has his limits.

I do have a house account there anyway and I won't be able to afford to eat at home for a while plus a (admittedly) small usage fee from the magazine.

As far as the actual images, I can't argue either way since this might have been the second "lifestyle" set I've ever done. I'm glad it wasn't an appendectomy .
However, the friend/client is happy, the publication ain't exactly the New York Times (it's a local weekly) and I made a friend's life a little easier so I'm not gonna argue about technicals. I will, however, be reading up on a new style in the coming months just to have some expansion capability.

That's good you go something out of it.

The minus on the pictures isn't so much genre related, but lighting. You have to find the balance of shooting with ambient as well as off camera flash.

jmphotocraft

Bilsen wrote: »

How many times have we all seen an image in a publication that would get torn to shreds here? I see at least 3 a week.

True dat!