Portraits CC welcomed

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 CC welcomed

Postby ozimax on Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:58 am

Did a family shoot yesterday. For weeks now we've had beautiful sunny skies and magnificent late afternoon sunshine, but alas as of yesterday the dark clouds rolled in right on shutter time!

Anyway, took some shots of some nephews and niece, was going to use 24-105 F4 IS but instead used 70-200 2.8 in darkish light.

Any comments on these will be appreciated, with thanks.

Ozi.

Image

Image

Image

Image
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
User avatar
ozimax
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5289
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:58 am
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW

Postby poompy on Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:29 am

nice series.

#3 looks like he is going to beat the crap out of you :D
User avatar
poompy
Member
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:41 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie

Postby gstark on Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:46 am

What I'm seeing in these (colour) images is similar to what I'm seeing from my 30D at this early stage of my ownership.

Please bear in mind that I'm using an uncalibrated monitor, but I'm seeing the wb on these - and my own - images as being too cool for my tastes.

In the case of your images, it may simply be the monitor I'm using, but at the moment I'm struggling to get the wb warmed up to the point where I'm happy with it.

I may even need to break out the manual at some point.


The B&Ws are great; I'd like to see a little more depth of colour in the colour images, and perhaps greater DoF in the first one. I can see what you're trying to do here, but my personal feeling is that, if this is supposed to be an image of the four people, shouldn't they all be in clear focus?

Cheers.
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 ozimax on Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:11 am

gstark wrote:The B&Ws are great; I'd like to see a little more depth of colour in the colour images, and perhaps greater DoF in the first one. I can see what you're trying to do here, but my personal feeling is that, if this is supposed to be an image of the four people, shouldn't they all be in clear focus?Cheers.


Good point Gary, I did take some other shots with greater depth of field (F10 from memory) and they seemed to be not too bad. The narrow depth of field stuff is a bit arty I admit, some people like it, some don't.

As for WB with the 30D, I'm only shooting in jpg because of my limitations in processing the images with my Mac mini eg it takes way too to process RAW but I think I may take a few in RAW and then alter the WB as needed to see what difference it makes.

Thanks for the comments.
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
User avatar
ozimax
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5289
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:58 am
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW

Postby Alpha_7 on Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:59 am

I really like the black and whites, and I'd agree a little more DOF in the group shots may make everyone feel as important.. if I was the guy at the back I'd have mixed feelings about being blurred compared to my siblings. (if that makes sense).
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9

Postby jamesw on Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:01 pm

One thing that I struggled with was that the oldest lad isn't smiling while the rest are...

I like the B&W of him though. The colours need some WB tweaking imo, look a bit cold on this monitor (a work one - admittedly uncalibrated)
body: nikon d200, d70s, f4s, f601.
lens:nikon 35-70mm f2.8, 70-300mm f4-5.6, 10.5mm f2.8, 20mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8.
flash: nikon sb600, sunpak 383 (x1), sunpak 555 (x4), pocketwizard plus II (x4)
jamesdwade.com
dishonourclothing.com
User avatar
jamesw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: norwood, adelaide

Postby ozimax on Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:09 pm

Alpha_7 wrote:I really like the black and whites, and I'd agree a little more DOF in the group shots may make everyone feel as important.. if I was the guy at the back I'd have mixed feelings about being blurred compared to my siblings. (if that makes sense).


Thanks Craig, I think Hayden is not worried at all about being blurry, he most probably likes it, but your point is taken, with different subjects they may object to be out of focus. It is different if it is only part of one person in focus as opposed to several subjects.

Ozi
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
User avatar
ozimax
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5289
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:58 am
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW

Postby ozimax on Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:11 pm

jamesw wrote:One thing that I struggled with was that the oldest lad isn't smiling while the rest are...

I like the B&W of him though. The colours need some WB tweaking imo, look a bit cold on this monitor (a work one - admittedly uncalibrated)


Funny you mention this James, but as a photographer I usually encourage my subjects to to smile only if that is their normal expression - smiling doesn't always suit some people and a different facial expression sometimes is more appropriate, at least in my own humble (silly) opinion! :D
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
User avatar
ozimax
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5289
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:58 am
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW

Postby jamesw on Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:21 pm

ozimax wrote:
jamesw wrote:One thing that I struggled with was that the oldest lad isn't smiling while the rest are...

I like the B&W of him though. The colours need some WB tweaking imo, look a bit cold on this monitor (a work one - admittedly uncalibrated)


Funny you mention this James, but as a photographer I usually encourage my subjects to to smile only if that is their normal expression - smiling doesn't always suit some people and a different facial expression sometimes is more appropriate, at least in my own humble (silly) opinion! :D


No that is definitely a fair call, it just initially struck me as odd.
body: nikon d200, d70s, f4s, f601.
lens:nikon 35-70mm f2.8, 70-300mm f4-5.6, 10.5mm f2.8, 20mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8.
flash: nikon sb600, sunpak 383 (x1), sunpak 555 (x4), pocketwizard plus II (x4)
jamesdwade.com
dishonourclothing.com
User avatar
jamesw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: norwood, adelaide

Postby Bindii on Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:04 pm

Clouds can be good... well I know I would prefer to shoot portraits in overcast weather rather than on a bright glary day...

I dont mind the limited dof as I am presuming that you did get a shot of all of them in clear focus so sometimes an arty type shot is a nice change...

Everyone else has said basically what I would have said.. if I had of gotten in first that is.... yeah I know sometimes I should just keep my mouth shut but the bonus is that if I say I like a shot its cause I do like it and I'm not just being polite....lol... anyways the only thing I can add to it is that it seems that you have maybe taken some of these images from a slightly lower viewpoint to them....as in looking up at them...not by much mind but a bit perhaps... this generally isnt the most flattering way to take a portrait as it tends to make people appear a little larger then what they are...and trust me the camera adds enough kilo's all on its own without us helping it....lol...

oh and Mum brushed their hair didn't she.... sorry but its just too neat and not natural enough... does that make sense?...

Still I do like them.... you did a great job! :)
The last thing I want to do is hurt you... but it's still on the list... ;)
User avatar
Bindii
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1895
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:28 pm
Location: Ormeau Hills Queensland

Postby ozimax on Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:50 pm

Appreciate the comments Sue. It seems that photographic images are definitely either flattering or unflattering but never quite accurate, your point is taken. Actually my niece is quite thin but these photos make her look "roundish" in the face. As for getting the level right, I'm never quite sure where to aim, but in any case we had a fun day.

The mother (my sister-in-law) likes the images, and now we have to decide on what sort of prints eg normal, canvas or a momento type presentation book.

Thanks again.
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
User avatar
ozimax
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5289
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:58 am
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW

Postby Matt. K on Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:39 pm

#3 and #4 are powerful images. You filled the frame, used the light, and kept em simple. Nothing else to say except well done.
Regards

Matt. K
User avatar
Matt. K
Former Outstanding Member Of The Year and KM
 
Posts: 9981
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:12 pm
Location: North Nowra

Postby ozimax on Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:02 pm

Appreciated Matt.
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
User avatar
ozimax
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5289
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:58 am
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW

Postby outtram on Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:54 am

#2 is my fav.

if there is any way of making the first kids eyes less dark i think the shot would be the much better for it.
User avatar
outtram
Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:29 pm
Location: Bentleigh East, melbourne

Postby gstark on Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:57 am

ozimax wrote:The narrow depth of field stuff is a bit arty I admit, some people like it, some don't.


That's not (quite) the issue, although I understand where you're coming from.

It depends a lot on the construction of the image, and in this case, I don't think the narrow DoF is really suitable.

Consider an alternate set-up, still the same four children, but divided into two discreet groups: one child and three children, with some space between the groups. In that setup, the narrow DoF will work treats, because you're throwing focus onto one or the other groups. In this case, you have four kids, all on almost the same plane, but we're simply running out of focus. :)

Oh yes ... focusing on the second (from the right, first photo) of the children might have helped too, as you have DoF both in front of, and behind, the selected focus point. By focussing on the second child, you are taking greater advantage of your lens's capabilities.

Finally, Sue makes a great point regarding the cloudy weather: it's great for portraits: no harsh shadows to deal with ....
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 ozimax on Wed Aug 15, 2007 9:18 am

gstark wrote:
ozimax wrote:The narrow depth of field stuff is a bit arty I admit, some people like it, some don't.


That's not (quite) the issue, although I understand where you're coming from.

It depends a lot on the construction of the image, and in this case, I don't think the narrow DoF is really suitable.

Consider an alternate set-up, still the same four children, but divided into two discreet groups: one child and three children, with some space between the groups. In that setup, the narrow DoF will work treats, because you're throwing focus onto one or the other groups. In this case, you have four kids, all on almost the same plane, but we're simply running out of focus. :)

Oh yes ... focusing on the second (from the right, first photo) of the children might have helped too, as you have DoF both in front of, and behind, the selected focus point. By focussing on the second child, you are taking greater advantage of your lens's capabilities.

Finally, Sue makes a great point regarding the cloudy weather: it's great for portraits: no harsh shadows to deal with ....



Thanks Gary, yes, points all taken. As for Sue's comment on cloudy light etc, the light was pretty even last Monday, but there is something to be said for late evening winter sunlight in Coffs, especially when it's filtered through bush fire laden skies at present, giving outstanding golden hues.

On the posing front Gary, does anyone know of an online source for a (preferably free) posing guide to groups and couples? I know you can purchase books etc but there must be some free resources there somewhere.

If you're doing portraits all day every day then posing the subjects becomes second nature, but for us part timers it requires a fair bit of thought.

Ozi.
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
User avatar
ozimax
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5289
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:58 am
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques