Christine


Status
Not open for further replies.

kirana

New Member
May 20, 2006
112
0
0
Singapore
Hi everyone, my first time doing this kind of shoot. Not really sure of what works. C&C are most welcome so I can improve. Thanks to Ivan for organizing and Christine.

Some of the photos









 

tom yam soup

New Member
Jan 24, 2007
287
0
0
37
hey there, 1st of all u got a great looking philippines model for the shoot. :lovegrin: For 1st photo,the lighting is flat and her eyes look a bit OOF, should ask her to move her shoulder outwards. 2nd photo is great but the reflector didnt no catch her shoulder hence its a bit distracting.:cry:
3rd photo is the weakest of all, she got a beautiful face but u r hiding her face in her own shadow:sweat: shuld have told her to comb her hair b4 u trigger ur shutter.4th photo is a gd attempt of closeup shot, again the strand of hair on her neck is distracting. Also take a gd look of her eyes, her eyes r filled with different lights and shadow from the trees above. otherwise its a gd attempt. 5th photo is the best of all. SEXY collar bone, love it :lovegrin: i would ask her to smile for this shot. Just my 2cents worth

Ps: Its my 1st time posting comment on works of others, pardon me if u find my comment to harsh. :angel:
 

scandisk

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2005
4,622
0
36
Tampines, Singapore
www.facebook.com
hmmmm...:think:....for awhile thot it was Penelope Cruz :bsmilie: .....anyway like the last two. Last pic would had been better if its sharper.
 

Canonised

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2003
2,988
4
38
hey there, 1st of all u got a great looking philippines model for the shoot. :lovegrin: For 1st photo,the lighting is flat and her eyes look a bit OOF, should ask her to move her shoulder outwards. 2nd photo is great but the reflector didnt no catch her shoulder hence its a bit distracting.:cry:

Ps: Its my 1st time posting comment on works of others, pardon me if u find my comment to harsh. :angel:
I am surprised that you get a 1) "the lighting is flat" and 2) a bit OOF comments from Mr Ivan's photoshoot ..... IMO, Ivan, being an experienced and good shooter himself, has always prepared very well ahead adequate (or more than adequate) giant reflectors for his shoots. In your case, I think it's due to probably, 1) low ISO and 2) lens. :think:
A L-lens would definately save the situation, i think.
 

swizard

New Member
Apr 25, 2004
114
0
0
S'pore???
I am surprised that you get a 1) "the lighting is flat" and 2) a bit OOF comments from Mr Ivan's photoshoot ..... IMO, Ivan, being an experienced and good shooter himself, has always prepared very well ahead adequate (or more than adequate) giant reflectors for his shoots. In your case, I think it's due to probably, 1) low ISO and 2) lens. :think:
A L-lens would definately save the situation, i think.

Interesting...
Maybe you would like to elaborate how a L-lens can save a situation of:
1) flat lighting
2) OOF
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,085
14
0
I am surprised that you get a 1) "the lighting is flat" and 2) a bit OOF comments from Mr Ivan's photoshoot ..... IMO, Ivan, being an experienced and good shooter himself, has always prepared very well ahead adequate (or more than adequate) giant reflectors for his shoots. In your case, I think it's due to probably, 1) low ISO and 2) lens. :think:
A L-lens would definately save the situation, i think.
1. The area for the first shot was in the shade. There's not enough light for the reflectors to reflect. ;)

2. Low ISO/too fast shutter speed/too small aperture used

3. An L-lens "will save the situation"? Oh PLEASE! What nonsense!
 

leejay

Deregistered
Sep 18, 2006
4,622
0
0
Pic 4 is good. :thumbsup: And a nice exchange of opinions by old birds. Interesting~:cool:
 

kirana

New Member
May 20, 2006
112
0
0
Singapore
hey there, 1st of all u got a great looking philippines model for the shoot. :lovegrin: For 1st photo,the lighting is flat and her eyes look a bit OOF, should ask her to move her shoulder outwards. 2nd photo is great but the reflector didnt no catch her shoulder hence its a bit distracting.:cry:
3rd photo is the weakest of all, she got a beautiful face but u r hiding her face in her own shadow:sweat: shuld have told her to comb her hair b4 u trigger ur shutter.4th photo is a gd attempt of closeup shot, again the strand of hair on her neck is distracting. Also take a gd look of her eyes, her eyes r filled with different lights and shadow from the trees above. otherwise its a gd attempt. 5th photo is the best of all. SEXY collar bone, love it :lovegrin: i would ask her to smile for this shot. Just my 2cents worth

Ps: Its my 1st time posting comment on works of others, pardon me if u find my comment to harsh. :angel:
Hi thanks for your feedback, appreciate that.
Point 1 - 5 noted.
Guess was too trigger happy for this shoot
Don't mind at all with your comment. Will try better next tim.
 

kirana

New Member
May 20, 2006
112
0
0
Singapore
hmmmm...:think:....for awhile thot it was Penelope Cruz :bsmilie: .....anyway like the last two. Last pic would had been better if its sharper.
I'll take that as a good sign... :bsmilie:

Just realized it when putting it up on the monitor. Anyway of sharpening the eyes only with PP without really jeopardizing the whole photo?
 

kirana

New Member
May 20, 2006
112
0
0
Singapore
I am surprised that you get a 1) "the lighting is flat" and 2) a bit OOF comments from Mr Ivan's photoshoot ..... IMO, Ivan, being an experienced and good shooter himself, has always prepared very well ahead adequate (or more than adequate) giant reflectors for his shoots. In your case, I think it's due to probably, 1) low ISO and 2) lens. :think:
A L-lens would definately save the situation, i think.
Hi Canonized, thanks for your feedback.

I'm using E-500 actually so I guess it's my lens that's not contributing to the desired photo. :cry: Perhaps should get better lens?
 

kirana

New Member
May 20, 2006
112
0
0
Singapore
Pic 4 is good. :thumbsup: And a nice exchange of opinions by old birds. Interesting~:cool:
Thanks leejay.

Well at least my effort not really wasted... :bsmilie:
 

Youhong

Senior Member
Dec 30, 2004
3,920
0
36
I am surprised that you get a 1) "the lighting is flat" and 2) a bit OOF comments from Mr Ivan's photoshoot ..... IMO, Ivan, being an experienced and good shooter himself, has always prepared very well ahead adequate (or more than adequate) giant reflectors for his shoots. In your case, I think it's due to probably, 1) low ISO and 2) lens. :think:
A L-lens would definately save the situation, i think.
A pro can help to setup the reflectors or studio lights for you, but it is up to the indivduals to shoot.
 

modelinn

Senior Member
Apr 3, 2006
9,379
11
38
I am surprised that you get a 1) "the lighting is flat" and 2) a bit OOF comments from Mr Ivan's photoshoot ..... IMO, Ivan, being an experienced and good shooter himself, has always prepared very well ahead adequate (or more than adequate) giant reflectors for his shoots. In your case, I think it's due to probably, 1) low ISO and 2) lens. :think:
A L-lens would definately save the situation, i think.
Thanks Berd, for the explanation. For the 1st pic, its shot in a shaded area, and naturally, the dynamic range of highlight and shadow will naturally be small, and if there is no post processing done to improve the hi and lo values, generally u will get a so called "flat" lighting condition as what Tom Yam Soup mentioned. So if one decides to not to PP, then its generally better to shoot slightly over exposed so it doesnt look muddy in the dark areas, especially since its portraiture. But I always believed if u have decided to embrace DSLR, one better complete the route by learning PP to correct the pitfalls of digital imaging that film does not suffer from. Nevertheless its a good attempt by Hadi, #1's expression is well captured. :)
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,085
14
0
Hi Canonized, thanks for your feedback.

I'm using E-500 actually so I guess it's my lens that's not contributing to the desired photo. :cry: Perhaps should get better lens?
There's nothing wrong with your lens. That comment about getting a high-end lens is mostly rubbish, since your main issue was underexposure.
 

sci80298

New Member
Jul 16, 2006
401
0
0
Soul City
www.charlesyip.com
I think wat canonised meant was that a L-lens is usually a fast lens and hence able to overcome the underexposure issue while retaining low ISO and higher shutter speed.

Looking at the 4th pic I think there's no need to spend on good lens first. Just need to keep on practicing with what you have kirana and you'll see your photos improve real soon.

There's nothing wrong with your lens. That comment about getting a high-end lens is mostly rubbish, since your main issue was underexposure.
 

kirana

New Member
May 20, 2006
112
0
0
Singapore
Thanks Berd, for the explanation. For the 1st pic, its shot in a shaded area, and naturally, the dynamic range of highlight and shadow will naturally be small, and if there is no post processing done to improve the hi and lo values, generally u will get a so called "flat" lighting condition as what Tom Yam Soup mentioned. So if one decides to not to PP, then its generally better to shoot slightly over exposed so it doesnt look muddy in the dark areas, especially since its portraiture. But I always believed if u have decided to embrace DSLR, one better complete the route by learning PP to correct the pitfalls of digital imaging that film does not suffer from. Nevertheless its a good attempt by Hadi, #1's expression is well captured. :)
Thanks Ivan.

But how do I set the hi and low in PP? Really have no clue on this. Is it something like curve? :dunno:
 

kirana

New Member
May 20, 2006
112
0
0
Singapore
I think wat canonised meant was that a L-lens is usually a fast lens and hence able to overcome the underexposure issue while retaining low ISO and higher shutter speed.

Looking at the 4th pic I think there's no need to spend on good lens first. Just need to keep on practicing with what you have kirana and you'll see your photos improve real soon.
Point Noted sci80298.

As I was using ISO100 throughout the shoot, will that mean 200 or 400 be fine? If I decide to do a print, provided that other factors are favourable, will the print out be fine as well?

Thanks
 

modelinn

Senior Member
Apr 3, 2006
9,379
11
38
Thanks Ivan.

But how do I set the hi and low in PP? Really have no clue on this. Is it something like curve? :dunno:
Play with levels :)
 

Sjourn

Senior Member
Aug 9, 2004
967
0
0
Punggol 21
she looks like penolope cruz....;p
 

Status
Not open for further replies.