Portraits of a mother to be

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.

Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.

Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.

Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

Portraits of a mother to be

Postby Reschsmooth on Sun May 06, 2007 9:39 pm

We finally got our act together and tried some portraits of Alicia.

What I found was that you need:

1. A decent amount of space to set up a "studio".
2. Good backdrops.
3. An understanding of how lighting works.
4. A decent understanding of what poses work.
5. Photographic skills.

Unfortunately, my stock of these was quite low.

However, I would really appreciate C&C on these (posted with Alicia's approval :lol: ). In particular - what kind of lighting works, what to think of in terms of flattering poses, etc.

Image

Image

Image

Choice of clothing was a bit limited - I personally think they were a bit too dark.

Cheers

P
Regards, Patrick

Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935.
Our mug is smug
User avatar
Reschsmooth
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Just next to S'nives.

Postby MATT on Sun May 06, 2007 9:44 pm

I really like these..

No1 is my pic. It could be better if she was wearing the same as 3.

Good job though.

Cheers
MATT
User avatar
MATT
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:24 pm
Location: Biloela, QLD-----nikon--D700-----

Postby Geoff on Sun May 06, 2007 9:48 pm

Patrick Patrick Patrick!?!?
Criticism? Hmm...that's not easy.
I think you've achieved a truely great outcome!
Can you imagine the joy you will get from showing 'junior' these images in years to come?? great emotive stuff!! You've done well son! The only thing I'd 'critique' is that in the first image Alicia doesn't seem too happy about having the photo taken. Obviously it's hard to tell where this photo fell in the actual shoot sequence but the way you've posted them seems like she warmed up to the idea as the images progress. It could be considered a pensive shot, but it looks more like 'I'm over this pregnancy thing'. I'm sure I'm wrong but it's how it appears to me.

Your thoughts on the clothing being too dark...in my opinion, yes and no.

No because they accentuate the beauty of the pregnancy and the skin tones contrast well with the darkness.

Yes, because perhaps some colour would add more (for want of a better word) vibrance to the image.

To me, your lighting setup is spot on.

The perfectionist in me (when looking closely) wants to remove the quite obvious wrinkle in the material in the 2nd shot, but that's nitpicking.

I also think that these would look good in B&W.
Geoff
Special Moments Photography
Nikon D700, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 70-200 2.8VR, SB800 & some simple studio stuff.
User avatar
Geoff
Moderator
 
Posts: 7791
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 12:08 am
Location: Freshwater - Northern Beaches, Sydney.

Postby Reschsmooth on Sun May 06, 2007 10:08 pm

Thanks for the feedback guys.

Geoff, in the first image (they were posted in the order they were taken), Alicia was a bit uncomfortable, and she is a little over the pregnancy (some days, when bub is sitting heavy) :lol:

The backdrop was a bit of a pain and I wasn't happy with the wrinkles.

One thing that I got a lot of satisfaction about was that I was targeting some 'rembrandt' type lighting, which I think I managed to achieve in a couple of shots.

I still have a lot to learn about lighting ratios, placement, etc, but it was a lot of fun. :lol:

Thanks again for the encouraging words.

P
Regards, Patrick

Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935.
Our mug is smug
User avatar
Reschsmooth
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Just next to S'nives.

Postby rooboy on Sun May 06, 2007 10:49 pm

Great set of photos. I don't want to parrot what Geoff said but I completely agree. I'd love to see these in a low key B&W treatment.

A great counterpoint would be to do a high key set - white clothes, white background.
So join in the chorus, and sing it one and all!
User avatar
rooboy
Member
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:14 am
Location: Maroubra, Sydney

Postby Marvin on Sun May 06, 2007 11:02 pm

I really like the low key of number 1 but the radiant facial expression of number 2. I prefer it when you can't see the distinctive line of the clothes and think that number 3 would look great like this - the emphasis would be totally on the tummy and the body.

(By the way, tell her that she looks great - my last baby was almost 12 lb and I would have never bared my stomach to anyone!)
Nikon D7000
User avatar
Marvin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1486
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:33 pm
Location: Back in the hot Riverland, SA.

Postby gstark on Mon May 07, 2007 8:30 am

PAtrick,

Excellent series,

No, the clothign isn't too dark, but you to, with adjustments to the lighting, introduce a bit of separation between the subject and the background. That will address the problem of Alicia blending into the background as has happened in the first of these.

Yes, you do need some distance/space to set up these images properly. I sense that the lights were a bit too close, as I'm seeing some blow-out in Alicia's right hand in the second, and in the bump on the third. I suspect that your light-to-subject distance was a tad limited, and thus you have a lesser range within which to work in order to gain an acceptable exposure. I'd probably dial down the power of the flash a little n order to try to overcome that sort of issue.

Great stuff, and well done to Alicia too por having the courage to permit you to post these personal, but very beautiful and emotive images.
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22924
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby Oscar on Mon May 07, 2007 8:57 am

Patrick, Alicia, well done. A lovely series of shots.

My favourite would have to be #2, then #3 - as these, to me anyway, show the radiance of a mother-to-be. And #1 shows the other side of it -yeah, I'm over this whole thing scenario.

Brings back fond memories of (too) many years ago. A wonderful time. Well done.

Cheers, Mick :) :) :)
User avatar
Oscar
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1305
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 11:15 am
Location: Panania, Sydney

Postby Reschsmooth on Mon May 07, 2007 9:34 am

Thanks everyone - the positive and constructive feedback is very much appreciated.

Marvin wrote:(By the way, tell her that she looks great - my last baby was almost 12 lb and I would have never bared my stomach to anyone!)


12lbs! Wow :lol:

rooboy wrote:I'd love to see these in a low key B&W treatment.

A great counterpoint would be to do a high key set - white clothes, white background.


I tried a number of different B&W conversions, particularly in no 3, but the stomach blew out too much (don't tell Alicia I said that! :lol: )

I too would have loved to try a high key set however, we don't really have any good white backgrounds.

gstark wrote:
introduce a bit of separation between the subject and the background. That will address the problem of Alicia blending into the background as has happened in the first of these.


I was really aiming for some form of background separation, given the colour of both clothing and background, and was using the Metz for this. However, the batteries in the Metz were dying a slow death (they lose charge over time!), I forewent its use and used one of the brollies to try to provide some hairlight and separation, without a great effect, unfortunately.

gstark wrote:Yes, you do need some distance/space to set up these images properly. I sense that the lights were a bit too close, as I'm seeing some blow-out in Alicia's right hand in the second, and in the bump on the third. I suspect that your light-to-subject distance was a tad limited, and thus you have a lesser range within which to work in order to gain an acceptable exposure. I'd probably dial down the power of the flash a little n order to try to overcome that sort of issue.


I agree totally with what you said, and a key issue was the light-subject-background distance - I was using the 17-35 in all of these!

There is also the major issue of learning (via loads of practice) how to set these things up and reduce the trial and error approach (which doesn't suit my personality one bit!) associated with this.

gstark wrote:Great stuff, and well done to Alicia too por having the courage to permit you to post these personal, but very beautiful and emotive images.


I would honestly expect that her permission is at least partly a result of her interest in photography as well. She doesn't like her own picture taken, so for her to allow me to post these, I was very thankful and it did take a fair bit of courage from her - that's why I am a lucky bloke! :D

Oscar wrote:My favourite would have to be #2, then #3 - as these, to me anyway, show the radiance of a mother-to-be. And #1 shows the other side of it -yeah, I'm over this whole thing scenario.


I think that describes exactly how she feels - she wouldn't trade it for a thing, but has more recently been asking if I can take over carrying the bub for a while :lol:


Thanks again for the feedback.

Patrick
Regards, Patrick

Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935.
Our mug is smug
User avatar
Reschsmooth
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Just next to S'nives.


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques