A senior and her mom.

Hackbone · April 17, 2010

Had a great senior come in and I asked mom if she would pose also. With alittle coaxing she did. Lots of resemblence. Used an Alien Bee ring light with a moon unit attached.

1

2.

3.

4.

Swartzy · April 17, 2010

Don't ya just love that ring light? Really like #2 & 3. Well done. Nice soft lighting..easy as pie..hehe....I love using it too as it's "idiot" proof....

Hackbone · April 17, 2010

A fellow told me to get about a foot away from the subject with that particular light. It does do odd things to the eye but I can't just bring myself to get that close to a subjects face with that unit.

adbsgicom · April 17, 2010

I really like #3.
2 & 4 seem really magenta to me;

Nice stuff, and thanks for sharing.

heatherfeather · April 17, 2010

With the first two, I almost thought I had blundered into the "go figure" forum....

Very pretty ladies, and they do look a lot alike!

Have you got that ringlight on camera or off?

Hackbone · April 17, 2010

Heather it is a very small ring light that has a moon light box attached to it. All on camera from Paul Buff at Alien Bees.

PhotoLasVegas · April 17, 2010

heatherfeather wrote:

With the first two, I almost thought I had blundered into the "go figure" forum....

Yeah, me too... and that's very inappropriate for a Sr. in HS to have the illusion/assumption of nudity. Sorry to be so blunt, it's just wrong.

dogwood · April 18, 2010

PhotoLasVegas wrote:

Yeah, me too... and that's very inappropriate for a Sr. in HS to have the illusion/assumption of nudity. Sorry to be so blunt, it's just wrong.

Bare shoulders give you the illusion/assumption of nudity?

Really?

There are loads of womens clothing designs that feature bare shoulders (strapless dresses, tube tops, etc). I'd suggest you tone down your vivid imagination. Nothin' but bare shoulders in these pics. That's a far cry from nudity.

In terms of a critique of the photos, looks to me like the post-processing work on the skin is a little heavy. I like to see a little bit of texture, but that's just a personal preference.

Ed911 · April 18, 2010

dogwood wrote:

In terms of a critique of the photos, looks to me like the post-processing work on the skin is a little heavy. I like to see a little bit of texture, but that's just a personal preference.

I have to agree with the assessment on the skin processing...way too heavy in 2 and 4. Number 3 is better and number one looks okay. A little slider therapy may be needed.

That's just my two cents.

Hackbone · April 18, 2010

Pete, thanks for stepping in on the nudity. Anyone that knows me realizes that is the furthest from my mind. Mom and the daughter were OK with the photographs and they are head shots in my opinion.

On the processing I used a Nik filter that the ladies just love so I like to do what they pay for. I'm a hopeless romantic and I haven't found a lady that didn't say make me look beautiful. This forum likes to see much less processing that another forum I hang out in . Maybe it is a north and south thing. Down south they just love that look.

D'Buggs · April 20, 2010

HB, I have a Q.

I remember the ring-light you bought last year. Is this the same?
I don't recall these catch lights; its like the pupil is nearly replaced by them...

Hackbone · April 20, 2010

D'Buggs
This is a different light all together. The older ring light was about 18" in diameter and was a constant light source. The new unit is an Alien Bee ring light (about 10") with a large (34"ish) moon light attached to it. It is a flash unit. It produces a shadowless light and can be used much further away for a 3/4 shot. I was told this can produce similar results but then it needs to be about a 16" from their face. I've been somewhat afraid to get the unit that close to the subject.

jeffreaux2 · April 20, 2010

heatherfeather wrote:

With the first two, I almost thought I had blundered into the "go figure" forum....

I have to agree with this sentiment.

When a subject is wearing a strapless contraption, it is important to compose "low" enough to include enough of the clothing so as not to give the impression of nudity. There's nothing here to tell me she's not nude.

...and Im not saying your intentions are off.....just that the composition can change the look entirely.

As for the lighting...I dont particularly care for it except in the "mom" shot, but Im generally not a fan of studio photography anyway...soooo.....stir in my grain of salt.

Hackbone · April 20, 2010

Jeff, no problem. I have a high moral compass and a thick skin so I can take criticism. I always look at it as constructive. There always is some lemonaide in every lemon.

I am the opposite of you. I rather photograph indoors, my hair wilts in the humidity we have here.

PhotoLasVegas · April 20, 2010

jeffreaux2 wrote:

I have to agree with this sentiment.

When a subject is wearing a strapless contraption, it is important to compose "low" enough to include enough of the clothing so as not to give the impression of nudity. There's nothing here to tell me she's not nude.

...and Im not saying your intentions are off.....just that the composition can change the look entirely.

As for the lighting...I dont particularly care for it except in the "mom" shot, but Im generally not a fan of studio photography anyway...soooo.....stir in my grain of salt.

Thanks, again I agree and I resent being told I have a dirty mind because I see it too.

18+ years old, sure, no problem... but for a Sr. shoot, I think we all need to be extremely careful for even the POSSIBILITY that someone would mis-understand the photo.

A photog friend of mine got an AMAZING family photo of the family all sitting on different branches of a tree - it took like 20 minutes to set up (which is an eternity with our styles). But she missed that the 6yo daughter had her legs slightly spread and you could see just a sliver of her panties. Editing didn't work, it still looked like you were looking up her skirt. So the shot was completely scrapped. You can't be too careful!

Art Scott · April 20, 2010

Great shots....I like the processing and skin smoothing........as to the style of the shot......I see it done here all the time.......every photog here brings in a touch of glamour into all senior sessions....including guys with shorts off...............

Great Job and keep up the good work.....as long as the client is happy ........that is all that truly counts.

thumb

bow

thumb

bow

wadesworld · April 20, 2010

What's interesting to me is that the first picture really appears "naked" while the second one less so. I think that's a result of the higher crop on the second one.

Kathy Ray · April 20, 2010

I think the mom is more relaxed than the daughter; I prefer her look.
~Kathy

D'Buggs · April 20, 2010

Hackbone wrote:

D'Buggs
This is a different light all together. The older ring light was about 18" in diameter and was a constant light source. The new unit is an Alien Bee ring light (about 10") with a large (34"ish) moon light attached to it. It is a flash unit. It produces a shadowless light and can be used much further away for a 3/4 shot. I was told this can produce similar results but then it needs to be about a 16" from their face. I've been somewhat afraid to get the unit that close to the subject.

All righty then, I'll have to look it up but I'm not liking the catch-lights in the head shots.

I'm on good TV this time 'round and I really like the looks of 2 and 3. IMO 1 isn't bad but is lacking *something* and 4 is the opposite - it seems a little "over the top".

I've tried wrapping my head around the nudity thing, and just don't see it... I can understand showing a young persons undergarment in a photo but I don't get implied 'nothing' from these.

Nice work!

dogwood · April 20, 2010

PhotoLasVegas wrote:

Thanks, again I agree and I resent being told I have a dirty mind because I see it too.

18+ years old, sure, no problem... but for a Sr. shoot, I think we all need to be extremely careful for even the POSSIBILITY that someone would mis-understand the photo.

Many seniors ARE 18 years old.

But you don't have to be 18 to show bare shoulders in a photo.

DeuceFour · April 21, 2010

Art Scott wrote:

Great Job and keep up the good work.....as long as the client is happy ........that is all that truly counts.thumbbowthumbbow

If they are loving it thats what it's about!! And I'm diggin the Glamour look!! #3 is my favorite, wish the elbow wasn't cropped out but it's still good to me.

Scootersbabygirl · April 21, 2010

I have a daughter, and I know that if I were to see pictures like this of my teenage daughter, I would be uncomfortable with it. Even just having some spaghetti straps would make me much more comfortable with the head shots.

Candid Arts · April 21, 2010

For what it's worth, I thought the first photo was nude as well and as I scrolled down to the second, that became less, and the third...well, obviously not.

First photo though really throws out no top on, instantly for me.

The pupils are REALLY bugging me in really all of the photos. It's like they both have pure white pupils... Kinda creepy.

My .02.

A senior and her mom.

Comments