my first photoshoot...

Not a bad effort. :) She looks like an intersting model to work with.

Sorry to be critical, but nearly all the shots look quite overexposed though, and some of them almost look like you've used some hard light layers, exept the blacks aren't deep enough for that.

I think I prefer the shot behind the railings as mentioned above too. The others all have some distrations and strange compositional elements that pull me away from the subject, but that one works as the 'distraction' makes a good feature/viewpoint in itself.

For this sort of shoot I'd normally go out with some ND's and strobes to allow for better aperture and key light control. Being able to independantly tweak the ambient and artificial light seperately really adds to the creative and artistic freedom.

Keep them coming though mate. I look forward to seeing how you develop.

Thanks for sharing. :)
 
Good effort. :)

A.D. raised some good points. Did you shoot in RAW? In which case you can easily fix the overexposed shots.

Not sure what lense you used. Try a zoom some time too if you have one - stand a good bit back, eg 10+ feet and zoom into the model. It blurs the background but shows the model perfectly. A lot of pro photographers use the technique quite a bit.

Great model by the way - I really like her look.
 
Last edited:
I use canon 60D with built in flash (don't have any other flash - I make mostly videos) and have tamron 50-17 so... And no, I didn't shoot in RAW... I don't have ML if that's what you mean...
 
A.D. said:
Sorry to be critical, but nearly all the shots look quite overexposed though, and some of them almost look like you've used some hard light layers, exept the blacks aren't deep enough for that.
Click to expand...

what do you mean overexposed? I mean I know what you mean but... What do you mean? lol
The weather was weird, the sky had white clouds and the only light I had was the built in flash on my 60D so had to make it bit brighter and make it look like there was a bit of sunlight

The others all have some distrations and strange compositional elements that pull me away from the subject
Click to expand...

again... what do you mean? lol... what distraction? I am asking cuz I want to know for future :)

For this sort of shoot I'd normally go out with some ND's and strobes to allow for better aperture and key light control. Being able to independantly tweak the ambient and artificial light seperately really adds to the creative and artistic freedom.
Click to expand...

you are talking to 100% amateur here... what is ND and strobes ?
"tweak the ambient and artificial light seperately really adds to the creative and artistic freedom" the what?

I need it explained like for a dummie lol
 
LDS said:
what do you mean overexposed? I mean I know what you mean but... What do you mean? lol
The weather was weird, the sky had white clouds and the only light I had was the built in flash on my 60D so had to make it bit brighter and make it look like there was a bit of sunlight



again... what do you mean? lol... what distraction? I am asking cuz I want to know for future :)



you are talking to 100% amateur here... what is ND and strobes ?
"tweak the ambient and artificial light seperately really adds to the creative and artistic freedom" the what?

I need it explained like for a dummie lol
Click to expand...

LDS said:
I use canon 60D with built in flash (don't have any other flash - I make mostly videos) and have tamron 50-17 so... And no, I didn't shoot in RAW... I don't have ML if that's what you mean...
Click to expand...

Yeah agreed the first six photos especially appear slightly overexposed.

I apologise if you know what I mean with the following things, I thought I would just explain them to save later posts and perhaps to help anybody else reading.

You can fix this by dropping the ISO (less light hits the sensor). The lower the number the darker your shot will be. You can change the number by pressing the ISO button on the top.

You can also change the size of the aperture (the size of the hole on the lens to let light in). As I assume you know the lower the number the more Depth of field you experience. It also lets more light in. Making the number higher in this case will make the hole smaller, therefore letting less light in and therefore creating a darker image.

Or you can change the shutter speed. The faster the shutter opens and closes the less light gets in, therefore making a darker image.



An ND is a Neutral density filter which effectively works like sunglasses. It is another external option to make the image darker alongside the above ones. Basically it reduces the amount of light that can get in. This is especially useful when you have a desired shutter speed and aperture and yet it is still bright, like if you are doing a long exposure in daylight. They're generally $15-30 in a single strength and $100-200 for a variable strength for the cheap ones. My understanding is that they are like lenses where expensive glass does change something.
You can see one in action here

Strobes are like camera flashes (as in fast flashing lights), but I've never used one nor know much about them so I can't give much of answer there.


SLRS (all current digital ones afaik) come with the ability to take RAW photography. In Canons the file is called a .CR2. I'm not exactly sure what the default setting is but I'm fairly certain that it is to take a JPG and RAW image. RAW files on a Canon are typically 15-25mb. Basically they store more detail including things like the exposure which can be fixed easily by opening the CR2 file in Photoshop, Lightroom or Bridge. You tweak many things here and in fact the first one is the exposure. It also stores the changed information so if you decide you want to change one of those settings you tweaked you can reopen the file and slide the sliders back to their original positions. You can also easily adjust the white balance.

All these camera settings can be done with the built in Canon software
 
Strobe photography is flash photography. That can mean a small compact flash, or the big studio lights.

If you're Ken Rockwell, you think fill flash is all you need. If I understand him right. If you're other people, you probably want off-camera flash.

Why should you want off-camera flash? Fill flash, which is what your built-in flash gives you, is the nuclear option. It's why everyone's drivers license photos look like crap. It "fills" everything on the subject in. Well, that can give you fine results. But the human nervous system evolved in a world where light usually struck objects, like other people's faces, from varying angles, which gives us a sense of depth and shape etc. when we look at them. And that's one reason why light striking people in photos from varying angles tends look more pleasing than the "nuclear option," or strong fill light alone.

Yeah, I read that in a book. =)

And that's the same reason why you probably don't generally want to use fill light alone when shooting a film...in an indoors setting, at least, or I'm guessing. You probably want to use three or four or more point lighting.

And it just gives you a lot more control over the look you get.

If you're interested in strobing, check out these:

Strobist, for sure. Particularly, Lighting 101. Keep clicking "Next." There's a series of pages to help introduce you to strobing.

I haven't watched them all, but Matt Granger's tutorials seem really helpful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ06Z4JbGHg&list=PLAAEF7ADB5E6B5D41


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy3T_2DwvUo
 
in that case I think I just over-edited them, I wanted to give them the summer on 60's look - guess that didn't work? :(


Here is original picture without editing
lvpn.jpg


edited
_MG_4602%20final%20edit%20S.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top