How To Slim Down A Model????

saurora

This is a 2-part thread...

(1) I haven't looked at the compact digital market for a while as I am perfectly happy with the one I have and rarely use it anyway. But I ran across this article and was quite intrigued with the concept of a camera that has a "slimming" feature.

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/devlin/4573


So what is it in a camera that could accomplish making a person look slimmer? Ziggy? I know wide angle lenses aren't flattering, but I'm just curious.

(2) Part of my curiosity is that I will be shooting some portraits of my niece who is in her 20's pretty soon. I haven't done any full length photography for many years and I have forgotten the "rules' of how to shoot a flattering shot of a woman (in particular). She has weight issues and I certainly don't want to make her look "heavier" than she thinks she is. She certainly isn't heavy in my opinion, but recent breast augmentation has also made her appear heavier than she was a year ago.

Any good suggestions for a book? Is there a lens length for the Canon 20D that would be optimum? Any good suggestions for shooting (angles, etc.) would be much appreciated. I have done some searching, but not really finding what I'm looking for. I plan to shoot outdoors, probably at the beach. There are some huge boulders there for sitting/standing on and of course just some shots standing near the water's edge.

Thanks in advance for your help!

Andy

Gotta run to airport but

shoot from above - long focal length, NOT wide angle.

Art Scott

Posing Women....
SAURORA.....

Take a look at this site ( CLIK HERE ) for many decades, Peter Gowland (and wife Alice) was responsible for the Calendars for the Rigid Tool and Snap On Tool companies as well as shots fpr Playboy (and many other pubs. as well) and Many movie stars promo shots (headshot and portraits).

Also when I have had a question and email them I have alsways gotten a reply back and they have always seemed to enjoy helping.

While doing weddings I found that I never liked the shots that were staight on or with bride turned at 90* from the camera....always a slight angle seemed to flatter the heavier woman better...jmho....

wxwax

Grab the lastest issue of Photoshop User magazine for PS tips on slimming in post.

Art Scott

wxwax wrote:

Grab the lastest issue of Photoshop User magazine for PS tips on slimming in post.

Does this work only in CS2 or will it work in PS7 or CS??

saurora

Andy wrote:

Gotta run to airport but

shoot from above - long focal length, NOT wide angle.

Thanks for the answer on the run, Andy. Is the 35 I bought from you too wide? I have the 50 f/1.8, but it's not as sharp and I have trouble focusing with it. I also have the 85 f/1.8, which I have hardly ever used since it's too long for indoors. Maybe it's my best bet. I also have the 24-105 f/4.0. I may have to run down the location and do some test shots.

saurora

Art Scott wrote:

SAURORA.....

Take a look at this site ( CLIK HERE ) for many decades, Peter Gowland (and wife Alice) was responsible for the Calendars for the Rigid Tool and Snap On Tool companies as well as shots fpr Playboy (and many other pubs. as well) and Many movie stars promo shots (headshot and portraits).

Also when I have had a question and email them I have alsways gotten a reply back and they have always seemed to enjoy helping.

While doing weddings I found that I never liked the shots that were staight on or with bride turned at 90* from the camera....always a slight angle seemed to flatter the heavier woman better...jmho....

Thanks for the link, Art. I will delve further into the site later when I'm not at work! Looks like it has some good pointers and that's what I need.

saurora

wxwax wrote:

Grab the lastest issue of Photoshop User magazine for PS tips on slimming in post.

Thanks, Sid. I use to have a subscription to this and then cancelled. I'll grab a copy!!

saurora

Of course I should be shooting from above............did I tell you I get very dizzy up high looking through a lens???? I can just see me perched on top of the rocks with my tripod.....

wxwax

Art Scott wrote:

Does this work only in CS2 or will it work in PS7 or CS??

I'd have to go back and reread, but I *don't* think it's CS2 specific.

Nope, it involves changing the canvas size, no CS2 trickeration.

Seefutlung

85 should be perfect. Shallow DOF. Rembrant or equal lighting (where part of the face in shadows). ... vertical stripes (lol) or at least "slenderizing black". Good Luck.

Gary

digismile

As a general rule, that which is closest to the lens is largest. So the angle or plane of the camera sensor matters.

The slimming technique generally used in photoshop is basically using the transform function where you either increase the vertical or narrow the horizontal by a couple of %. A little is hardly ever noticed, too much and it looks out of proportion. Read the Photoshop user article, it's worth it.

Check out the book called "Corrective Lighting, Posing and Retouching for Digital Portrait Photographers" by Jeff Smith.

Lots of good info. A lot of his techniques involve using shadow as a way to divert the eye from people's flaws. There is also some discussion about photographing women and the kinds of retouching you might do.

Regards,

Shay Stephens

Just say no!
Short lighting helps, angles and height helps. But in the end, people are what they are. I don't PS people thinner, it is a huge waste of time, never looks right except on people already mostly thin, and the client typically is never satisfied anyway.

saurora

Seefutlung wrote:

85 should be perfect. Shallow DOF. Rembrant or equal lighting (where part of the face is in shadows). ... vertical strips (lol) or at least "slenderizing black". Good Luck.

Gary

Thanks, Gary...I hope to shoot late afternoon so shadows should be readily available! She isn't really heavy, but you know how women are!

saurora

digismile wrote:

As a general rule, that which is closest to the lens is largest. So the angle or plane of the camera sensor matters.

The slimming technique generally used in photoshop is basically using the transform function where you either increase the vertical or narrow the horizontal by a couple of %. A little is hardly ever noticed, too much and it looks out of proportion. Read the Photoshop user article, it's worth it.

Check out the book called "Corrective Lighting, Posing and Retouching for Digital Portrait Photographers" by Jeff Smith.

Lots of good info. A lot of his techniques involve using shadow as a way to divert the eye from people's flaws. There is also some discussion about photographing women and the kinds of retouching you might do.

Regards,

Thanks for the referral on the book, Brad. I'm hoping not to have to do any re-touching (or very, very minimal) but the techniques for diverting the eye sound interesting. I'll check it out.

saurora

Shay Stephens wrote:

Short lighting helps, angles and height helps. But in the end, people are what they are. I don't PS people thinner, it is a huge waste of time, never looks right except on people already mostly thin, and the client typically is never satisfied anyway.

Just say no.......lol!
Thanks, Shay...I was hoping you would respond as I know you shoot lots of women! I don't really want to do any PS to make someone thinner....I'm mainly looking to pose her in a flattering way to avoid that. It just might make for some interesting reading though.

Shay Stephens

saurora wrote:

Just say no.......lol!
Thanks, Shay...I was hoping you would respond as I know you shoot lots of women! I don't really want to do any PS to make someone thinner....I'm mainly looking to pose her in a flattering way to avoid that. It just might make for some interesting reading though.

Look into short lighting, lighting the side of the face farthest from the camera, and shadow the area under the chin. This helps in a slimming way. And the few posing tricks mentioned help too. But in the end, a big person is going to look big no matter what you do.

Andy

saurora wrote:

Thanks for the answer on the run, Andy. Is the 35 I bought from you too wide?

Yes. Wide angle will *not* flatter your subject. Use the 24-105 at 80 or more FL.

saurora

Gottcha! Thanks Andy!