ChaosFoxCostuming on 5 years ago
I know a lot of the photo's are similar but I wasn't sure which ones to upload like what was best of worst you know.
That would be the first problem and fortunately you have identified it. Fortunately you are not as bad as most people with this problem. To me the set doesn't get real interesting until the last nine photos. They all got something interesting and different going on.
The first 12 photos the subject doesn't seem too into it and could really benefit from some extra direction. She seems bored, uncomfortable or just not ready. Out of the first 12, there are about 4 I would have kept.
In some of the pics there seems to be this unusual cropping. Some pictures are skinny rectangles, some are square and some are normal. I prefer the original dimensions of a cameras aspect ratio unless you are dealing with more complicated factors such as a specific stylized look, something horrible got in the shot, prints or video.
The location is pretty good and this one is probably my favorite [url]https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=254039854771953&set=a.254039498105322.1073741841.210093412499931&type=3&theater[/url]
See how those walls and even the carpet are "coming toward" the subject? You need to do more stuff like that. If you cropped this photo at all, could you post the original here so I could see what it looked like before?
The worst has gotta be [url]https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=254039704771968&set=a.254039498105322.1073741841.210093412499931&type=3&theater[/url]
Angle and pose aren't too flattering. Background is brighter than subject and the glass is dirty.
What camera are you using?
ChaosFoxCostuming on 5 years ago
nathancarter on 5 years ago
Ken nailed a lot of good points.
Focus and sharpness look good. Facebook strips the EXIF but it looks like your other settings were under control. Good exposure on the skin, which is very important - so, nice work for your first time in full manual.
When viewing the set as a whole, it's clear that auto white balance was working against you. White balance is critical when shooting products and people - unless you're intentionally changing it up for creative purposes, don't let AWB give you slight variations from shot to shot. If you're shooting raw, you can fix it in post with no losses. If you're shooting jpeg, you can fix it in post but you have a lot less latitude to do so. Either way, when doing portraits, I like to set a custom white balance in the camera, every time the light changes.
As Ken noted, repetition is boring, and can kill a set that would otherwise have been good. A set of 4 great images is way, way better than a set of 12 (or 20, or 50) repetitive images. Part of your job is developing your eye to see what's good and what's not - and showing only the best. Shoot 10, show 2.
I think my biggest complaint/critique is this: It's your job to make a portrait that flatters the subject, and many of these just didn't accomplish that. You've got to help her look good, through a combination of a connection between her and the camera; direction in posing and facial expression; and flattering lighting. Don't take this too hard, though - it takes a lot of practice to get good at these things. I don't profess to be an expert, though I've gotten a lot better over the past few years, through study and practice and hard work.
I don't know the subject, but I can say with absolute certainty that she doesn't want a double-chin showing in portraits. But if she pulls her chin down/back for a "demure" look, she's gonna get one. That sort of pose just doesn't work for everyone. Here's a great tip:
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe3oJnFtA_k"]Peter Hurley: It's All About the Jaw[/URL]
Another trick: If the subject is concerned about the jawline, you can "cheat"in postprocessing, and use the burn tool just a little teeny tiny bit, to create a shadow underneath the jaw/chin and enhance the jawline. DON'T OVERDO IT though. And this won't work on every shot.
[[My wife gets a double chin in photos unless we're very careful to control it. The madame in our dance troupe does, too. If the photo shows a double chin on either of these ladies, I'm gonna have a Bad Time. So I've had to learn some posing tricks, lighting tricks, workarounds (hide it with the hair or props or hands or collar), and processing tricks.]]
Another thing to watch out for, is the upper arms. Pose with the upper arm pressed against the body, it's gonna look pudgy. Put some space between the elbow and the body, and both the arm and the waist will look slim.
My favorite is this one:
Cute pose, good connection to the camera, flattering to the subject. Good jawline, good eyes, the contrast between the book and the dress gives the illusion of a much slimmer waist.
Second favorite is probably the B&W, it's a very flattering pose, the best pose out of all of those next to the window. Looking up at the camera stretches and slims the neck and tightens the jaw; that type of seated pose gives her a nice S-curve, and the long hair minimizes the upper arms.
Wanted to wait until somebody else critique before I commented again and now someone has.
What I would have kept out of the first 12 was the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 8th.
I personally don't mind "big sets" too much, but there is gotta be something a little different going on at least.
Here is what a typical set can look like from me
Nowadays I just send who I worked with those images privately and only post 2-3 of them publicly.