Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > People Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 17, 2011, 12:59 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Ordo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: BsAs
Posts: 3,452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielchtong View Post
Ordo,

Maybe you did not get that. I did not set up the lighting nor did I pay for the make-up artist at all. The lighting equipment sales people set it all up and we were like a whole bunch of wolves all firing around her. It was a zoo as mentioned by Bynx.

Daniel
I think i got it...
But picks are yellowish. It's just a color cast problem that you can easily solve with a little pp. You know: skin tones, hue, saturation, etc. Quick try:

__________________
With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Max Ehrmann.

Last edited by Ordo; Oct 17, 2011 at 1:06 PM.
Ordo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2011, 2:29 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ordo View Post
I think i got it...
But picks are yellowish. It's just a color cast problem that you can easily solve with a little pp. You know: skin tones, hue, saturation, etc. Quick try:
Ordo

I routinely email people to do pp work for me before posting. Anyone can do a better job. And yours is better.

Maybe you can work on this one as it was not condensed at all. It was shot wide open too at F2.8

http://www.pbase.com/danieltong/imag...70870/original


Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2011, 4:30 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Ordo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: BsAs
Posts: 3,452
Default

__________________
With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Max Ehrmann.
Ordo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2011, 4:59 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,888
Default

Ordo: you did well. Thanks

For this set I did not do any color balance. Do not ask what it means as I have no idea what I was doing. What is important is how you would compare these with the earlier page of this thread.
Also I have been playing around with the very complex GIMP under Ubuntu too. That free program is very elaborated .















What are you guys' view?


Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2011, 5:00 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,888
Default

Another difference too. All these were taken at F4.5 while earlier batch were in F2.8/3.5
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2011, 6:36 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Ordo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: BsAs
Posts: 3,452
Default

Just cause i'm in love with her.

__________________
With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Max Ehrmann.
Ordo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2011, 7:45 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DigMe View Post
135mm is a good choice for female closeup portraits of this sort and definitely far better than 50mm. Anything under 100mm will have at least a little bit of perspective distortion on a face (though I think 85 is probably not that noticeable) and 50mm will have quite a bit even on an APS-C sensor.

See an example here:

brad
Brad

I am a long shooter and I am very comfortable shooting portrait with 135/200mm which is like 300mm in film's term

Thanks for the link and great illustration


Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2011, 8:14 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
kazuya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,006
Default

those are some good shots considering what sounded like challenging conditions
and some great PP there ordo
good stuff
kazuya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2011, 8:17 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kazuya View Post
those are some good shots considering what sounded like challenging conditions
and some great PP there ordo
good stuff
Hey Thanks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DigMe View Post
135mm is a good choice for female closeup portraits of this sort and definitely far better than 50mm. Anything under 100mm will have at least a little bit of perspective distortion on a face (though I think 85 is probably not that noticeable) and 50mm will have quite a bit even on an APS-C sensor.

See an example here:
http://www.stepheneastwood.com/tutor...n/tilepage.htm


brad
I am a long shooter and my usual portrait lens happens to be 200mm. There was some talk about using long lens resulting in flattening facial features.
The argument is that for people from the east with flatter nose should avoid using long lens.

http://photo.net/pentax-camera-forum/00PbW5

Very interesting argument for (and against too)

It was an old thread in 2008 and I think Dave had taken out image of his wife showing the flatten nose effect. Very cool



Daniel

Last edited by danielchtong; Oct 26, 2011 at 8:20 PM.
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:33 PM.