Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Photo Critiques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 9, 2005, 4:01 PM   #1
Moderator
 
Frank Doorhof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,320
Default

A great new model for me, named Esther, makeup by Conny.



1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


Much more on www.doorhof.nl/models under Esther 2.

Greetings,
Frank
Frank Doorhof is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 9, 2005, 6:27 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

Hello Frank,

I assume you've posted on this forum because you want an honest critique of your work rather than the usual it looks great comments you receive on the People Photos Forum you regularly participate on.

You didn't mention the intent of these images, though it is quite clear these are not portrait attempts. I'll respond as though these are glamour shots and possibly model portfolio updates.

In the first image your Center of Interest (COI) is the white wrap. Since it is not shown in it's entirety,I doubt this is intentionally done as a fashion advertisement. A high key shot or white background would have worked better to keep the model as the main subject. For this type of shot, I find the dark shadow of her left arm to be an unpleasing distraction because it is too harsh while the overall lighting is soft. Better fill placement would have eliminated this.

Image 2: The key light appears to be too low creating an unpleasing nose shadow to the left. Generally for models, it is a good idea to capture all detail of their hair. Here, I feel you need more fill so more hair texture is visible between her face and hair. The facial angle and lighting isn't particularly flattering here. Her jawline is heavy rather than the nice cheeks we like to see on females.

Image 3: This is basically a low key scene where the eyes should be the brightest element. Lacks catch light in right eye.

Image 4: Model has a long face and a different style of lighting may have been more flattering for her. I generally broad light females who have long faces. Key/fill ratio is too high for this shot on this model. IMHO Brightest element is the pants. Was this intentional? The shadow on her shoulder is an unpleasing element here.

Image 5: Facial angle is more pleasing here. I'm not crazy about the pose because it makes her legs look short and fat and not as shapely as they could look. The shadow betweenher neckline to her cleavage is also an unpleasing element here.

Image 6: Again, the legs look too short and plump here and aren't as shapely as I'd like to see. Some corrective techniques would have worked well for this model. I would have liked to seen more of her cleavage here. Moving the camera more to the right would have provide this and possibly would have been a bit more flattering on the legs.

I didn't look at the gallery images of this model, but on these images I'd liked the lips to have more of a presence. The make-up shades used work nice for her. Possibly the MUA can give them more of a presence for the next shoot.

This is all that jumps out at me for now. :-) Thanks for sharing!

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 10, 2005, 3:44 AM   #3
Moderator
 
Frank Doorhof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,320
Default

Hi,
I could of course take a one by one approach about your comments, but I will do it a bit more quick :-)

First off there is NO intention to my shots...I try to make a good session for my model and MUA and myself, so there doesn't have to be anything for sale or whatever.

1. When applying the rules, I should have taken the half body or full body, but sometimes you have to break the rules and make a picture more intressting, or in lay mans terms, make something people don't expect. Because this model is not the tallest in the book, I decided to make her look longer by applying a simple illusion of length by going longer than half body.

2. Please investigate some studies on lighting like the golden triangle or butterfly lighting technique before commenting on another picture than the totally flashed out and flat lighted picture. When looking closely you can see that I have combined the butterfly and golden triangle, thus creating something different than the textbook rules. Again, breaking the rules is sometimes nicer than making shots every starter can make. About the details in the hair, please check your calibration of the monitor. In the hair there is all the detail, although dark it's there.
The effect used is a burned through layer which will give the model a golden glow associated with the 70's-80's glamour and hollywood style, which also again reflects back to the butterfly lighting, this combined with a modern style glamour pose and clothing and the use of the golden triangle combination made this picture work for me.

3. Low key??? Check the book on what low key is, this is in NO way a low key picture. It's a portrait with again a dark shadow part which makes (well for me in any case) an intresting.

4. The pants and booths are lighter than the shirt, here the softbox was straight in front of the model, slightly tilted upwards because you never know how high a model will jump, if you check the little shadow next to the nose you can see the lighting was placed correctly and the conclusion would have been properly made that the pants and boot are lighter than the rest which happens to be true.
This could also easily have been seen without knowledge of light by the fact that the skin on the body of the model has the same intensity as the skin on the left side (for you the right side) of her face, which also would have told you the softbox was on the right side (for the photographer) aimed at the WHOLE body slightly angled upwards.

5. With a model which has not legs for eternity you can do 2 things. One give her a big kick in the butt just as long as needed to grow the extra 50" .

Or choose a lower angle. Remember I did not create this model on my PC, this is a model that walked in and which we did a shoot with, I defintly will NEVER EVER alter the appearance of a model, but I will try to make her look her best.

6. Again we have to work with the way our models look, and this girl was stunning believe me, however the skirt she was wearing was not flattering on the behind when ligthed completly, but because we loved the skirt and look we decided to play a bit with the light to make sure part of the back would disappear (making her look very nice in the skirt and not showing that it was a BIT too short in this position). Again for the legs, she has not the longest legs you would like to see but, by cutting the lower part and choosing a slightly lower angle we made her legs stand out.

Look, I understand from your posts that you only work with the probarbly finest models in the world. I do not have the status that I can choose my models from the best of the best. However I do work with the finest models in my league and these models are almost alway's special in their looks and in their poses! I love to work with Esther, but models also have shortcomings, some have a big bottom, some have short legs, some are small but well porportioned and some are just plain stunning. I think the power for me lies in selecting the way THESE models look their absolute best and without playing plastic surgeon on them in PS making them natural and good.

Thanks for taking the time to comment, but please make sure all the facts are correct. On taste we cannot argue, that is very personal...but there is more than lighting 101.

Greetings,
Frank
Frank Doorhof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2005, 4:17 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724
Default

I'm content to look first and ask questions later, when it comes to photography...and as I learn more and become aquainted with so called rules...I am reminded that rules are made for a good reason.

I am also reminded, that...for a good reason, one should B R E A K the rules. I love the color and tone in number one, it does make her skin look soft and tanned. I like the look of her posture, the way her arms fold to her chest, that combined with the over the shoulder glance give a nice warm feeling of modesty to her expression. She is nicely lit, and the shadows are soft, compliments the posture. Number three with the eyes looking over the glasses is one of my favorites. I love seeing girls look like that, and the color is rich the details are sharp, and I love looking at this. Despite how well she's lit, the contrast is there IMO, and the soft colored background works for my eye. The shadow is another of my favorite things to see in faces, it really magnifiesmood, and that's one of the things I like best about your work, you make the mood come out. At this stage of my photographic experience, I am much more interested in seeing how one can use posture, color and shadow and facial expression to give the viewer a feeling for the shot. If application of rules and adhering to formula are all thats required I doubt Ansel Adams would have said "There's nothing worse than a sharp picture of a fuzzy concept." I am aware there are no comments of mine here that point out where improvement could be made. I'm content to stay where I'm comfortable, and would like to critique on what I like and say why I like it.Whenever I reach the point where I feel on par with the work of whoever's presenting, I might venture advice on improvement. Until that happens, I'll be happy to enjoy posts like this, and continue to say why. (A sort of...critique on technique.) Thanks, I enjoyed this post...best regards,

KennethD
KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2005, 5:23 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

#1. Your explanation has nothing to do with my comment, but I appreciate your detailed description. You've failed to mention what the intended center of interest is here.

#2. I'm well educated with all the lighting styles. My comments are not style specific. The nose shadow is an unpleasing, unnecessary element. I didn't say there is no hair detail. I said there needs to be more hair detail in the shadows. Pump up the shadows in post and you'll see a tighter ratio is more flattering here. Although this is a bad facial angle, you'll see that bringing out more detail in the shadows will make her jawline look less heavy. You don't want flat lighting?? Use more specular highlights!

#3. I understand what low key is. Indeedy this isn't a great low key example if that was the intent, but her pink top is the only element that isn't keyed low. Since you've stated this is a portrait, then I have to say you haven't executed this one very well. The eyes should be the focal point.

#4. I'm not sure what the set-up explanation have to do with my comments. Are you presenting a pretty model wearing pink pants or pink pants on a shapely model?

#5. I appreciate you do not create your subjects on the computer...That isn't my style either. Better light placement, laying on the floor with a longer tele lens will do the trick nicely.

I apologize for offering a critique when you obviously only wanted to hear the good stuff. My comments have nothing to do with following rules. Each image contains unflattering elements that you obviously do not see. It is up to the photographer to suggest flattering poses, clothing options and to chose the best background and lighting options. My comments are about the techniques and not the model.

Rodney

RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2005, 12:39 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
r00022's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 164
Default

FRANK, I LOVE YOUR WORK.

KEEP THEM COMING!


,PN
:-)
r00022 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2005, 1:41 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 99
Default

Over all I think you did a very good job here, way better than I could do, but I have to agree with Rodney about the lighting in #4; she went from being really hot in the other pictures to looking like a girl in my old math class.

I think she has very sexy legs.
Proxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2005, 2:20 PM   #8
Moderator
 
Frank Doorhof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,320
Default

Look it's like this (says he who is a beginner anyway )

PERSONAL TASTES SHOULD NEVER EVER be forced as a rule.
Shadow play is something that one person loves, and another one hates.
When looking at some of your shots Rodney I see legs dissapearing in the dark, and also some very dark details, so somehow you do like the shadow play.

One thing I really don't like is commenting like someone knows it all by the rules of light, there are no rules, except that there are no rules .

One of my best pictures is a silhoutte, breaking the major rule of photography, namely lighting your model LOL.....

Please behave you all or I will be forced to come to the states with some models and kick some ass or chew bubblegum and I'm all out of bubblegum :lol:
Frank Doorhof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 11, 2005, 8:34 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
surfnron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 578
Default

Rodney and Frank -
I probably shouldn't step in here but I like Frank's photos and I enjoy Rodney's critiques. To me, critiques are someone's OPENIONS. Be careful asking for them - you might get what you ask for. I also don't believe Rodney was trying to get personal, BUT it might be better if he included something like: "In my openion" in his critiques.
To BOTH of you - please don't let this dissagreement drive either of you away. I learn lots from both of you.
Thanx for reading,
Ron
PS: I hope I didn't offend anyone, these are my OPENIONS. :?
surfnron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2005, 2:16 AM   #10
Moderator
 
Frank Doorhof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,320
Default

I'm never angry on comments, but they have to be correct.
When being read a lesson I want that to happen on the right reasons and not because there would be some rule breaking which can work in the advantage of the shot.

I never apply any rules, except that the shot must be intresting.
Frank Doorhof 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 4:30 AM.