DSLRUsers.com

Thanks to Patrick (Rechsmooth) I setup the studio lights in the unit today and Bel agreed to model for me (so I jumped at the chance). Here's a B&W I quite liked. Any criticism on pose/lighting comments more than welcomed. Minimal PP, slight sharpening of the eyes and the 85 1.4 did the rest. I used one brolly (white) within close proximity to Bel. SB800 on manual with 1/16 flash power, flash WB and ISO 200. F6ish.



There are a few things 'not quite right' about this, I think the flash was a LITTLE too high powered and the highlights on her lower forhead distract a little (and on the chin) but I don't think it's a lost shot because of them.

Geoff

Portraiture isn't my forte and I know didly about lighting, but that's a very powerful image you have captured. Bel just stares right out of the screen at me.

Hi Geoff,

I admit that portraiture isn't my strength.
The BW portrait is very nice - I like it.
The colour portrait suffers from "hot" forehead, chin and cheeks if you know what I mean.
Either these parts of the face were too reflective or too much light was present.

HTH,
CD

A very compelling image Geoff, the first one of Bel is great, the eyes have it they just suck you right into the image. The lighting works well, and the jewelery all compliment the image. If I had to be really picky the wispy hair on her right, our left is a little too close to her eyes but that is being super picky.

The second one fails to engage me Bels distracted the lighting isn't as complimentry and is a bit hot, Bel is looking elsewhere which leads me out of the frame rather then grabbing my attention.

/Please thank the lovely Bel for being your willing assistant and model.

A very compelling image Geoff, the first one of Bel is great, the eyes have it they just suck you right into the image. The lighting works well, and the jewelery all compliment the image. If I had to be really picky the wispy hair on her right, our left is a little too close to her eyes but that is being super picky.

The second one fails to engage me Bels distracted the lighting isn't as complimentry and is a bit hot, Bel is looking elsewhere which leads me out of the frame rather then grabbing my attention.

/Please thank the lovely Bel for being your willing assistant and model.

Thanks guys - I have a heap more to go through but I had to persuade pretty hard to have these posted here

I agree the 2nd one is a bit 'hot' but I liked it, despite this.

Geoff,

What's the hiostogram like?

Posing is great, but they're way too hot for what I'd call portraits.

Gary - the histogram on the first one was near 'normal' - i.e even distribution..the 2nd one ...well u can imagine.

Great to see you diving into portraiture.

Im guessing the histogram on the first has a high line leading off the right hand side? This is indicating the blown highlights.

It would be educational if you posted a jpg with the histogram visible.

Does anyone eles no the best make up to use on studio models, as I also noticed on last Saturdays shoot that Benedicta's make up tended to sparkle rather than be a matt finish.

Cheers
Greg

greg wrote:Great to see you diving into portraiture.

Im guessing the histogram on the first has a high line leading off the right hand side? This is indicating the blown highlights.

It would be educational if you posted a jpg with the histogram visible.

Does anyone eles no the best make up to use on studio models, as I also noticed on last Saturdays shoot that Benedicta's make up tended to sparkle rather than be a matt finish.

Cheers
Greg

That’s why in pro shoots you have makeup artists

Geoff, these are good shots, however, as has been pointed out, they seem a little hot in places. I can't tell for certain, but I think the foreheard/chin areas are more overexposed rather than blown (meaning they can be recovered).

What did you have the studio light set at? You could also reduce the aperture as well.

Great start.

I don't know why you don't get Bel to pose more often for you Geoff. You have access to a beautiful model, and you're a photographer... it's like a match made in heaven!

As has been mentioned, they look a little hot - but you got the posing down pat. Trendy fashion poses.

Thanks Chi - let's just say she's a (very) relucant model 95% of the time...when she agrees (and yes, I ask all the time to model for me) I jump at the chance - this afternoon we shot this series about over an hour period. It was great fun and Bel enjoyed it too (I think)

Reschsmooth wrote:Geoff, these are good shots, however, as has been pointed out, they seem a little hot in places. I can't tell for certain, but I think the foreheard/chin areas are more overexposed rather than blown (meaning they can be recovered).

What did you have the studio light set at? You could also reduce the aperture as well.

Great start.

Thanks Pat - sadly they are blown - not recoverable. My usage of the brolly and it's power got better as the shoot progressed. It was awesome fun and I will soon be purchasing my own set of lights.

The studio was about half strength if I recall correctly and obviously too close to Bel's face.

nice cathlights in the shots, with the round umbrella's. light has a very good softness about it.

did you use a meter? the exposure as highlighted above, think a flash meter would help here

Oz_Beachside wrote:nice cathlights in the shots, with the round umbrella's. light has a very good softness about it.

did you use a meter? the exposure as highlighted above, think a flash meter would help here

Oz - no - just in camera meter and didn't really utilise it either. This was more experimental.

Geoff, moving the brolly closer will provide a larger relative light source that will provide much softer shadows. However, as you halve the distance, you increase the light by a factor of 2 (if I understand the inverse square law correctly). Regardless, you significantly increase the light as you move it closer.

Also, correct me if I am wrong, but it looks like you had the brollie pretty square on? You could try to move the brollie to be further front on, thereby getting less reflection from Bel's forehead and upper cheek?

Mind you, I think you have managed to light the Bel's left cheek quite well - no harsh shadows.