The other shot is a pano from Dee Why taken about 3 weeks ago with some great cloud formation. B&W conversion was via Channel Mixer, with reds pumped and blues dropped.
C&C appreciated



Dee Why & Some PortraitsModerators: 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.
Previous topic • Next topic
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Dee Why & Some PortraitsHaven't posted many photos lately. Here are some portraits taken at Manly damn - I was trying to get some cross lighting, balancing sunlight and flash. Unfortunately, after we set up the flash and brolly, we only had about 5 mins before Alex let us know he needed attention.
The other shot is a pano from Dee Why taken about 3 weeks ago with some great cloud formation. B&W conversion was via Channel Mixer, with reds pumped and blues dropped. C&C appreciated ![]() ![]() ![]() 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
Re: Dee Why & Some PortraitsHi Patrick,
Nice to see some images from you. I think the first image is the best out of the three here. Alicia's pose looks comfortable, relaxed and genuine. The catch light in here eyes is beautiful. I would like to see all of her head though, not a huge fan of the cut off, but that's being ultra picky. The 2nd image I am distracted too much by the reflections on the water (white) top left of the image. The light distribution across Alicia's face is very uneven and looking at the image, the left side of her face is too dark/shadowed. I do like the presence of the pine tree though. 3rd image is great, but I'd like to see even MORE contrast! I think that'd make it look truely spectacular. Thanks for sharing ![]() Geoff
Special Moments Photography Nikon D700, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 70-200 2.8VR, SB800 & some simple studio stuff.
Re: Dee Why & Some PortraitsThanks Geoff,
Regarding the reflections off the water, my original intention was to try to set up the SB800 so I could use the high-speed sync, but unfortunately, I was limited to normal synch of 1/250th, and I didn't want to increase the DOF too much, hence the exposure of the background. I agree with your comments on the shadows in the 2nd - I think I should have moved the brolly/flash to be more front on and closer. I was concerned about increasing the contrast too much as I felt I would either blow out the main cloud or block up the detail in the right - hence this compromise. ![]() Cheers 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
Previous topic • Next topic
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|