Lens Diaries Go Now
Glamour, Beauty, Nude, Models, Photographers

*    |  Register  


 
Go Back   Garage Glamour™ > Garage Glamour™ Community Related Forumss > Photo Reviews & Critiques Only
 

Photo Reviews & Critiques Only Constructive & professional critiques only

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Tara
Old 12-23-2004, 09:48 PM   #1 (permalink)
Lifetime Photographer

 
girlfair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Member GG#: 38438
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 126
Comments: 0
My Mood:

girlfair is offline IP: 69.40.209.19
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Outside of blemish touchup in PS, this is how the shot came out, no glow, no level adjustment. I think I'm getting better at shadow reduction, but I still can't get that hard shadow at the corner of her nose and under her arm(ps-able, but annoying). Used a 500w Photoflood bounced off a white umbrella for the face light, Speedlight on the Rebel pointed a bit above the model and a sheet of foamcore behind her, leaning toward the hot light. (oh, I also did some background repair here.) Thoughts? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
  View Public Profile Send a private message to girlfair Visit girlfair's homepage! Find More Posts by girlfair
 
Re: Tara
Old 12-24-2004, 12:48 AM   #2 (permalink)
Pro Shooter

 
jimmyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Member GG#: 38375
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 4,078
Comments: 2

jimmyd is offline IP: 69.175.243.202
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

looks great, but i get the feeling you're kind of saying that things like level adjustments are a bad thing, or a "touch-up" thing, or maybe that we should strive to shoot images that don't require some PS fixing.

but digital has some shortcomings and some of these tools aren't really about "touching up" as much as they're about overcoming digital's inherent weaknesses-- like luma levels and sharpness. sure, diffusion glow and guassuan blur are purely effect tools (and can be used to aesthetically enhance images) but levels adjustment--as an example, to insure your blacks are black--are almost always a good idea to apply to digital images.

  View Public Profile Send a private message to jimmyd Visit jimmyd's homepage! Find More Posts by jimmyd
 
Re: Tara
Old 12-24-2004, 07:36 AM   #3 (permalink)
Lifetime Photographer

 
girlfair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Member GG#: 38438
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 126
Comments: 0
My Mood:

girlfair is offline IP: 69.40.208.9
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

No, not what I'm saying at all. PS and the power it gives me over final product is awesome. I just see so much great work that you can tell was great when it left the camera (or maybe it wasn't, maybe I'm being naive). My quest is to get to that place. Use PS to enhance my work, not resurrect it. That's an excellent point, though, about the inherent limitations of digital. Like I've said before, I'll be perfect someday, then I can quit trying so hard! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] I'm glad you liked the shot. Thanks for the input, Jimmy. Have an awesome Holiday.
  View Public Profile Send a private message to girlfair Visit girlfair's homepage! Find More Posts by girlfair
 
Re: Tara
Old 12-24-2004, 08:08 AM   #4 (permalink)
Lifetime Photographer

 
RSStory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Member GG#: 38048
Location: Grand Rapids
Posts: 916
Comments: 0
Send a message via AIM to RSStory Send a message via MSN to RSStory Send a message via Yahoo to RSStory

RSStory is offline IP: 68.72.8.103
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

I have seen a couple of your posts of this girl. The biggest thing that bothers me with this shots is her expression. She just looks like she doesnt want to be there or something. In this one I think the pose isnt all that flattering to her as well and I am not sure cutting off the tips of her fingers work here.

The shadow on the side of her nose may have been smaller if she had turned her chin slightly toward her right shoulder. You are shooting with hot lights so what you are seeing is what you get. Move her around a bit and pay attention to those shadows. You will get it. Keep shooting and keep posting. And, have a great holiday.

Scott

  View Public Profile Send a private message to RSStory Visit RSStory's homepage! Find More Posts by RSStory
 
Re: Tara
Old 12-26-2004, 12:27 PM   #5 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Member GG#: 37352
Location: indiana
Posts: 40
Comments: 0

washedup is offline IP: 12.222.103.176
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

You may want to try adding a reflector or another foam core board to camera left to bounce the light off of her face and to fill the area behind her nose and her arm. That's my 2 cents.
Monte
  View Public Profile Send a private message to washedup Find More Posts by washedup
 
LONGGGG WINDED on dis one hehehe
Old 12-26-2004, 06:07 PM   #6 (permalink)
**DONOTDELETE**
Guest
 
Member GG#:
Posts: n/a
Comments:

IP: 24.63.103.183
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

:-) HI Girlfair,

Have you tried exposure bracketing with your shots? I will explain what I mean in case you do not yet have experience in bracketing.( ITS BEEN A LIFE SAVER for me many times over)

Exposure bracketing is a simple technique professional photographers use to ensure they properly expose their pictures, especially in challenging lighting situations. When you expose for a scene, your camera's light meter will select an aperture / shutter speed combination that it believes will give a properly exposed picture.

Exposure bracketing means that you take two more pictures: one slightly under-exposed (usually by dialing in a negative exposure compensation, say -1/3EV), and the second one slightly over-exposed (usually by dialing in a positive exposure compensation, say +1/3EV), again according to your camera's light meter. The reason you do this is because the camera might have been 'deceived' by the light (too much or too little) available and your main subject may be over- or under-exposed. By taking these three shots, you are making sure that if this were ever the case, then you would have properly compensated for it.

As an example, say you are taking a scene where there is an abundance of light around your main subject (for example, at the beach on a sunny day, or surrounded by snow). In this case, using Weighted-Average metering, your camera might be 'deceived' by the abundance of light and expose for it by closing down the aperture and/or using a faster shuter speed (assuming ISO is constant), with the result that the main subject might be under-exposed. By taking an extra shot at a slight over-exposure, you would in fact be over-exposing the surroundings, but properly exposing the main subject.

Another example would be the case where the surrounding might be too dark, and the camera exposes for the lack of light by either opening up the aperture and/or using a slower shutter speed (assuming ISO is constant), then the main subject might be over-exposed. By taking an extra shot at a slight under-exposure, you would in fact be under-exposing the surroundings, but properly exposing the main subject.

When should you use exposure bracketing? Anytime you feel the scene is a challenging one (too much highlights or shadows) as far as lighting is concerned, e.g. sunsets are usually better taken slightly under-exposed so use exposure bracketing there, or whenever you want to be sure you don't improperly expose a fabulous shot.


Give that a shot my friend and I bet you will like the results of one of the shots better.

ALSO get that model working on her facial expressions! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]


JOHN :-)
 
 
Rather than bracket...
Old 12-26-2004, 10:44 PM   #7 (permalink)
Free Member

 
R_Fredrick_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Member GG#: 35872
Location: Dallas/Fort Worth Area
Posts: 3,660
Comments: 41

R_Fredrick_Smith is offline IP: 67.162.234.198
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Rather than bracket, just use the power of the modern digital camera and a gray card and you can zero in the exact exposure.
Cheers,
rfs
  View Public Profile Send a private message to R_Fredrick_Smith Visit R_Fredrick_Smith's homepage! Find More Posts by R_Fredrick_Smith
 
Because, the power of todays...
Old 12-27-2004, 05:47 PM   #8 (permalink)
**DONOTDELETE**
Guest
 
Member GG#:
Posts: n/a
Comments:

IP: 24.63.103.183
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Because the power of todays modern digital cameras does not mean the meter is fool proof. Bracketing helps you get the shot. But if you choose to just use a gray card. That's ok by me.

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I still stand behind bracketing and highly suggest this gentlman try it out. I believe it will help him more than just a gray card .

But don't take my word for it. Use a gray card for a reading. then take four more exposures. Go two exposures below and two above the reading. And see which works best for this type of lighting and subject. experiment. I bet you will love the outcome.


John
 
 
Re: Because, the power of todays...
Old 12-27-2004, 06:37 PM   #9 (permalink)
Lifetime Photographer

 
girlfair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Member GG#: 38438
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 126
Comments: 0
My Mood:

girlfair is offline IP: 69.40.214.214
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

I'll try them both! Thanks for the awesome info, gents! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]
  View Public Profile Send a private message to girlfair Visit girlfair's homepage! Find More Posts by girlfair
 
Re: Rather than bracket...
Old 12-27-2004, 08:10 PM   #10 (permalink)
Pro Shooter

 
jimmyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Member GG#: 38375
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 4,078
Comments: 2

jimmyd is offline IP: 69.175.243.202
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

if you rely on the "power of the modern digital camera" you'll probly be an uhhappy camper, uhh... photographer... more often than not.

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
  View Public Profile Send a private message to jimmyd Visit jimmyd's homepage! Find More Posts by jimmyd
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tara - Recent Shoot running_mustang Main Community Forum 1 05-12-2009 04:48 PM
Tara imagesbyjerry Main Community Forum 6 02-01-2006 01:24 AM
Tara girlfair Digital Darkroom 3 12-07-2004 10:12 PM


New To Site? Need Help? Photographer & Model Links
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:02 PM.

© 1999-2017 Garage Glamour™




Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93