My humble take of the Singapore Motorshow girls

[asterixsg]

I had a great time shooting the models, rather babes, at the Singapore Motor Show 2006.
Here's some of the best girls (not necessarily the best photographs) with killer looks, 'to-die-for' smiles and the best attitude. Hats-off to them. Its a hard job, much harder than we photographers go through. Just try prancing around and smiling for 10 hrs a day and you will know why.

If any of you guys arrange a photo shoot with these girls, please let me know. I will drop everything and join you all.

Finally, I will be going there again during the week. This time to shoot cars.

#1.
What can I say about her ? Isn't she gorgeous ? And of all the girls I shot there, she was the most accomodating, very patient (even while I was fiddling with my camera settings) and once I had her attention, she would ensure that I was satisfied with the photo I took, and there was a mutual acknowledgment. A big THANK YOU from me at the end, would seal the job.
Very professional.

#2.
I just can't figure out how her photograph comes out as a stunner !!!

#3.
Oh boy. This is a smile I would die for. I would go weak in my knees everytime she smiled (not necessarily at me), which was pretty often.

#4.
I shot many pictures of theirs - solo and together, and until I got this shot, I wasn't satisfied. They were very patient.

#5.
That enigmatic smile. As though there are a million secrets hidden behind that.

 

[asterixsg]

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

 

[asterixsg]

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15
Went weak in my knees. yet again. so image a bit soft lah.

Happy viewing. Any C&C most welcome.

 

[jeanie]

most of the pics looks grossly underexp in my monitor.

 

[kewellsg_07]

anyone knows the name of gal in #2 pic, she's the host of the Subaru section thx

 

[Jesmun18]

most of the pics looks grossly underexp in my monitor.

agree...

 

[Jix]

anyone knows the name of gal in #2 pic, she's the host of the Subaru section thx

how bout gal #6? she looks so pretty to me. i'd be the first to sign-up if she joins a shoot here in CS.

thanks for sharing.

 

[asterixsg]

most of the pics looks grossly underexp in my monitor.

Thanks jeanie.

Now that we know the problem, hope you can also advise me how to fix it.
1. I don't have an external flash - I relied on the camera's built in flash.
2. Almost all these photos were shot handheld using a 100-400mm lens. At longer focal lengths, the flash just isn't powerful enough.
3. I shot quite a few of these pics in Tv mode - shutter speed 1/250

With this info, I have a couple of questions.
1. Should I have used a tripod and reduced the exposure to a slower shutter speed, say 1/100 or even slower ?
2. I am a newbie at Photoshop and also don't quite believe in touching up photos. If the original is bad, too bad. Try again. That's my motto. But there are other folks who swear by PPing the photos in Photoshop.
Can these photos be rectified ? if yes, I would really appreciate if you can give me some tips on how to do so. if no, then the photographer needs to be shot :cry:

Thanks so much.

 

[Canew]

Bro, try pumping up the ISO. I noticed that you are using ISO 200. Try it at 800 or even 1600. (you've got a very capable camera there) Then you will be able to capture teh ambient light if the shots were taken using a lower shutter speed. I tend to use Av mode for situations like these. Open up the aperture to the max. Since you mentioned that you are using the 100-400 lens, then a tripod will be necessary for the low shutter speed shots as the '1/focal lengh' shutter speed rule will be broken. (but the lens has IS which will help you 2 stops, try it out to see if it is enough to shoot without tripod/monopod.)

 

[jeanie]

Thanks jeanie.

Now that we know the problem, hope you can also advise me how to fix it.
1. I don't have an external flash - I relied on the camera's built in flash.
2. Almost all these photos were shot handheld using a 100-400mm lens. At longer focal lengths, the flash just isn't powerful enough.
3. I shot quite a few of these pics in Tv mode - shutter speed 1/250

With this info, I have a couple of questions.
1. Should I have used a tripod and reduced the exposure to a slower shutter speed, say 1/100 or even slower ?
2. I am a newbie at Photoshop and also don't quite believe in touching up photos. If the original is bad, too bad. Try again. That's my motto. But there are other folks who swear by PPing the photos in Photoshop.
Can these photos be rectified ? if yes, I would really appreciate if you can give me some tips on how to do so. if no, then the photographer needs to be shot :cry:

Thanks so much.

i am no pro.i'm a newbie to digital photography myself.
your pics also dont look sharp.what lens are you using?
you can try to up the ISO to a max of 800.that's what i did.but of course, i'm using a f2.8 lens on that day.but upping the iso is one good way to prevent the underexp in your case.

i would think a monopod will be more 'practical' in those situations.tripod takes up way too much space.it's said that with a monopod, it's like a VR tool.(IS-image stabiliser) in your case since i assume you are using canon when you told ne about Tv mode.

your photos 'could' be rectify by ps.you should really try to learn some basic ps.
fyi, the pics in CS, i would darely and bravely said 90% of them, if not 95% of them has gone through PS.we're living in the digital world today.it's sad but it's true.so whether u like it or not, some basic ps will do you good.however, ultimate decision up to you lah of cos.

if u can send me the pics, i'll try to ps for you when i have time?
nmitanj@yahoo.com.sg
just send me one or two at full res.

 

[asterixsg]

Bro, try pumping up the ISO. I noticed that you are using ISO 200. Try it at 800 or even 1600. (you've got a very capable camera there) Then you will be able to capture teh ambient light if the shots were taken using a lower shutter speed. I tend to use Av mode for situations like these. Open up the aperture to the max. Since you mentioned that you are using the 100-400 lens, then a tripod will be necessary for the low shutter speed shots as the '1/focal lengh' shutter speed rule will be broken. (but the lens has IS which will help you 2 stops, try it out to see if it is enough to shoot without tripod/monopod.)

Thanks for the tips. I forgot all about ISO

I started off shooting in Av mode, set to F/4.5.
I found that the shutter speed was something like 1/10 or 1/20. There was too much camera shake. IS didn't help much.
Then, I remembered the 1/focal-length rule. I found I was shooting 'most' of my pics around 150-250mm focal length. So, I switched to Tv mode and set the shutter speed to 1/250 and kept shooting. When I went home and downloaded the photos to my laptop, I found they were underexposed.

 

[asterixsg]

i am no pro.i'm a newbie to digital photography myself.
your pics also dont look sharp.what lens are you using?
you can try to up the ISO to a max of 800.that's what i did.but of course, i'm using a f2.8 lens on that day.but upping the iso is one good way to prevent the underexp in your case.

i would think a monopod will be more 'practical' in those situations.tripod takes up way too much space.it's said that with a monopod, it's like a VR tool.(IS-image stabiliser) in your case since i assume you are using canon when you told ne about Tv mode.

your photos 'could' be rectify by ps.you should really try to learn some basic ps.
fyi, the pics in CS, i would darely and bravely said 90% of them, if not 95% of them has gone through PS.we're living in the digital world today.it's sad but it's true.so whether u like it or not, some basic ps will do you good.however, ultimate decision up to you lah of cos.

if u can send me the pics, i'll try to ps for you when i have time?
nmitanj@yahoo.com.sg
just send me one or two at full res.

Hi Jeanie,
Yeah, next time I will bump up the ISO to 800 or even higher.
I was using the 100mm-400mm L IS lens.

Thanks for your offer. Will email you couple of pics at full res, later.

I will grab some books on Photoshop from the library this weekend and plunge into them. Looks like there ain't much choice but to pp - especially since we are in the digital world.

Thanks a lot, once again. Appreciate it. :thumbsup:

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

err, next time please do self censorship before posting... if it ain't nice, please dun post it...

esp so many OOF, Underexpose, no eye contact, weird expressions etc etc...

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

i am no pro.i'm a newbie to digital photography myself.
your pics also dont look sharp.what lens are you using?
you can try to up the ISO to a max of 800.that's what i did.but of course, i'm using a f2.8 lens on that day.but upping the iso is one good way to prevent the underexp in your case.

i would think a monopod will be more 'practical' in those situations.tripod takes up way too much space.it's said that with a monopod, it's like a VR tool.(IS-image stabiliser) in your case since i assume you are using canon when you told ne about Tv mode.

your photos 'could' be rectify by ps.you should really try to learn some basic ps.
fyi, the pics in CS, i would darely and bravely said 90% of them, if not 95% of them has gone through PS.we're living in the digital world today.it's sad but it's true.so whether u like it or not, some basic ps will do you good.however, ultimate decision up to you lah of cos.

if u can send me the pics, i'll try to ps for you when i have time?
nmitanj@yahoo.com.sg
just send me one or two at full res.

depending on cam, if he bump to iso800, and noisy, also can't help much. I'd rather suggest using iso 400, then use a fill in flash on a lightsphere (simplest way to get good lighting, even newbies can do it...)

actually like you, i've thought that anything that goes thru the photoshop is not pro anymore... but i've corrected this mindset, cos when you take negative, you have a larger latitude for color change and exposure compensation, of course, handshake no cure... but when you bring your film to develop, the old school developer would do color & exposure correction like what we do on PS now... and if you use a P&S and know nuts about PS, most digital developers would do correction for you.

but if you say using PS to do cropping, adding of 'special' effects, then i'm still not that into those, i still prefer my old school kinda shooting. and i still prefer only slides and never shot negative...

overall, i'd recommend shoot raw, at least sometimes can salvage some underexpose pics.

 

[hwchoy]

that model (with the "killer" smile) in #3 and #15, isn't she Kanny featured in portraits a long time back?

 

[jeanie]

asterisk,

here's what i've done to help your underexp using ps.

open the image in cs2, then click control J.
change the blend mode in the layers palette from normal to screen.
if one step aint sufficient, keep clicking ctrl K to add a few more layers.
if u want a half layer fix, reduce the opacity of the top layer to 50%.or to whatever opacity that u think's good.

above is the simplest step to correct underexp photo.

there are definitely other ways.
another is to play with levels, or brightness and contrast.

i find levels and curves best to play with.

here's your original

here's the touched up one.i've also added some saturation to reduce the white from your flash.

 

[asterixsg]

Boy oh boy !!!

If this ain't magic, then I don't know what it is

Thanks thanks thanks.

I will try this out myself too.

BTW, she looks beautiful, doesn't she ? :lovegrin:

I will be there tomorrow to shoot some more. And this time I will watch out for underexposure.

Thanks, once again. Really appreciate it.

 

[Flash03]

Hi Bro

U use what program to do the retouch on the saturation?

Can i know?

 

[nemo]

Hi Bro

U use what program to do the retouch on the saturation?

Can i know?

she using adobe photoshop CS2

 

[Flash03]

Ok ic

Thank Man.