WCR3 wrote:
You'll hear from a lot of people more talented than I, I'm sure. First, I applaud you for wanting to master it one step at a time.

There will be many things that will be criticized or commented on about the image you posted, including cropping, color balance, the fuzzy green thing at the bottom of the image, the model's expression, the flat lighting, the lack of retouching on the models skin and eyes ... the list will go on and on. Don't despair. If it were easy, everyone would be a GOOD photographer.

You're a model. Talk with some of the photographers you've worked with and have a rapport with. Tell them you want to learn more about working behind the camera, not just in front of it. Offer to exchange modeling for lessons. I'm sure some, if not most of them will be delighted to spend time with you and bring you along as a photographer.

I'm sure you'll do well if you keep after it.

Well said WCR3!

WCR3 wrote:
You'll hear from a lot of people more talented than I, I'm sure. First, I applaud you for wanting to master it one step at a time.

There will be many things that will be criticized or commented on about the image you posted, including cropping, color balance, the fuzzy green thing at the bottom of the image, the model's expression, the flat lighting, the lack of retouching on the models skin and eyes ... the list will go on and on. Don't despair. If it were easy, everyone would be a GOOD photographer.

You're a model. Talk with some of the photographers you've worked with and have a rapport with. Tell them you want to learn more about working behind the camera, not just in front of it. Offer to exchange modeling for lessons. I'm sure some, if not most of them will be delighted to spend time with you and bring you along as a photographer.

I'm sure you'll do well if you keep after it.

Thanks! I have considered this and I haven't written it off. Right now I'm in the rudimentary phase, and I'm trying to focus on getting better when I can.

Back to the list though . All of that feedback would be lovely and helpful.

Lallure Photographic wrote:
Well, let's talk about what is a portrait, and what is a head shot, first. What you have, is truly not a portrait, and indeed, most "portraits" are not truly portraits, taken by pros. A true portrait is an image that reveals the person, and what they they are ABOUT. pros take portraits that flatter people, and please them, rather than a true portrait, which is more about defining who they are.

What you have here, is more of a head shot, which simply shows the facial features, of the subject. Nothing else is interjected, therefore, nothing else is present.

What do I see about the image itself? First the image is seriously off color. It appears to have been done, with the modeling lights on, and too close, at too slow a shutter speed, allowing the modeling lights to shift the color to the warm side, introducing far too much yellow. You have to use a faster shutter, or adjust white balance.

Next you shot from a higher than recommended camera angle, shooting down the plane of the face, rather than into the plane of the face. That distorts features, especially with lenses that are too short. The lack of any light in the hair, and the lack of any accent light, leave the image wanting. It looks flat, and even underexposed, as it is. The lower catch lights are broken into 2 catch lights, and it is far more desirable to have just one.

Hope that helps.

That helps a lot, thank you!

T A Y L O R  wrote:
Thanks! I have considered this and I haven't written it off. Right now I'm in the rudimentary phase, and I'm trying to focus on getting better when I can.

Next time you come over to Houston give me a shout. I'll be happy to work with you on working behind the lens instead of in front of it.

T A Y L O R  wrote:
Thoughts on lighting, composition, photoshop, and anything else that stands out? Thank you in advance!

As mentioned previously that blurry thing in the foreground is distracting.

You have to decide what looks right to you. So much about photography is opinion. This is very much true for portrait photography. For me, the lighting in this photo is too flat. Most of the purpose to using lighting that you can move around and adjust, aside from making the subject visible, is to model her features in a way that brings dimension to her form and also adds some sort of feeling about her. Different methods of  shading and highlighting stimulate viewers' feelings. You can be subtle with it or abrupt. The problem for you is figuring out what it all means and how it all works. I suggest you will learn a lot by looking at lots of portraits, note which ones grab your attention and figure out what it is about them that clicks with you and causes you to want to emulate them. And then emulate them and expand from there. Figure out your own way of doing it whether it's the same way thousands of others do it already or you discover something new. You can find some great portrait photography on 500px.

I think this particular photo is composed too tightly around the subject's face. She doesn't seem engaged with you, so this tight composition doesn't have the intensity you might get with somebody who's more emotional or reactive. We don't see much about this person, but she may have something interesting about her that could convey more information and interest if you include it in your composition.

Portraiture may be the most intimate sort of photography you can pursue. It is a very personal thing to do. A large proportion of my favorite photographers are portrait photographers.

DespayreFX wrote:
My 2 cents (but that's Canadian, so only 1.6 cents USD!)...

Can't argue with anything others have said, the things I noticed immediately:
the fuzzy thing at the bottom, why is that there?
the extra 2 lower catch lights in the eyes, don't like
the crop across the forehead is a little unflattering
the light is very dull across the entire face

On the plus side:

I don't mind the color palette generally,and I do like the lipstick choice, although I might photoshop the upper lip to be symmetrical, but that's just me. I think if you'd pulled back on this picture to give it a little context, depending on what was there, this might be a much better picture, even if that's the only thing you did, it's a little too cramped right now, without giving any reason for being so cramped.

Hmmm, is that a *4*th catch light at the very top of her eye??

Maybe give your model something to do other than stare at you, smiles are always good,there's no feedback from this model's face. I try to get some kind of response from my model right before I shoot, if I can catch that, I almost always get the best images from that moment. Lots of models feel they have to go to stone as soon as you point the camera at them, or worse, the dreaded "duck face" (if you haven't seen it, you will!)...

Also, while better equipment gives you better resulting image quality, it won't give you a better eye for composition and framing, and I think those things go a long way. A high quality boring image, is still boring. Watch your local Craigslist, or wherever, for a good lens you can afford, don't rush, they come and go all the time. If you're shooting Canon, I can tell you that the 50mm 1.8f will provide you with very good images, and that lens is just over $100.00. My 1.8 actually gives me better images than my 1.4, which was 5x as much money (yes, now that you ask, that *does* piss me off!). The 1.2 is  amazing, but you're well over $1000.00 for that lens.

Thank you! This is super helpful. Your 1.6 US Cents were incredibly helpful.

-The fuzzy green thing was an attempt to frame the picture with something. I like to play around with this with flowers and the greenery, but it's currently super cold here and I was shooting indoors, so I had to improvise. Haha, you're all right in that it's now the first thing I notice and it's like "what is that". Better work next time!
-I nevvvvver pay attention to catch lights, so this will be good for me to keep in mind! Now that I've spent a day away from it, I'm noticing how the three lights are distracting. Good to keep an eye out for!
-Cropping/composition are the two biggest things I struggle with. I watched a 5 hour course on Lynda on composition, but  I didn't actually like any of the compositions. Haha. Not very helpful! I just recently (like, yesterday) discovered digitalcameraworld.com and have been reading their articles on composition, lighting, etc. I've found them to be really helpful thus far, so we'll see what furthering my education there does! Any advice on resources is welcome.
-My lighting thus far has literally been me with a lamp. This falls into the "if I don't know what I'm doing with cheap equipment, I shouldn't be buying expensive equipment" camp. So I'll play with some different lighting "setups" and see what I can accomplish! Any advice here is welcome, since my knowledge of lighting is currently "it creates shadows depending on where you place it relative to the model."

Again, I'm playing around, but this is all super helpful, because it's easy to look at my own images and go, "okay, I don't love these", but it's hard to know WHY. The feedback seriously helps when I go to take new pictures.

I noticed the lip thing too, but am not skilled enough yet in photoshop (read: at all) to fix that. More fun things to learn. Thanks again!

T A Y L O R  wrote:
-The fuzzy green thing was an attempt to frame the picture with something. I like to play around with this with flowers and the greenery, but it's currently super cold here and I was shooting indoors, so I had to improvise. Haha, you're all right in that it's now the first thing I notice and it's like "what is that". Better work next time!
-I nevvvvver pay attention to catch lights, so this will be good for me to keep in mind! Now that I've spent a day away from it, I'm noticing how the three lights are distracting. Good to keep an eye out for!
-Cropping/composition are the two biggest things I struggle with. I watched a 5 hour course on Lynda on composition, but  I didn't actually like any of the compositions. Haha. Not very helpful! I just recently (like, yesterday) discovered digitalcameraworld.com and have been reading their articles on composition, lighting, etc. I've found them to be really helpful thus far, so we'll see what furthering my education there does! Any advice on resources is welcome.
-My lighting thus far has literally been me with a lamp. This falls into the "if I don't know what I'm doing with cheap equipment, I shouldn't be buying expensive equipment" camp. So I'll play with some different lighting "setups" and see what I can accomplish! Any advice here is welcome, since my knowledge of lighting is currently "it creates shadows depending on where you place it relative to the model."

Again, I'm playing around, but this is all super helpful, because it's easy to look at my own images and go, "okay, I don't love these", but it's hard to know WHY. The feedback seriously helps when I go to take new pictures.

I noticed the lip thing too, but am not skilled enough yet in photoshop (read: at all) to fix that. More fun things to learn. Thanks again!

You seem to have absolutely the right attitude.  Listen to others' ideas regarding composition and framing, but trust your instincts and experiment until you find what works for you.

In terms of lighting, I found starting with the classics was very helpful and seemed to fit into my own preferences.  With a single lamp you can experiment with the placements of it to create split, Rembrandt, butterfly/paramount in both broad and short lighting.  There are lots of articles on the web which describe these various portrait lighting schemes.  I found it helpful to re-create these patterns literally and then experiment from there to discover what I like and how I feel it presents the subject.

I also agree that there is no need to spend money on expensive equipment.  My first lighting purchase was a reflector and stand to use with window portraits.  I still use it today, but also have other reflectors made from foamcore etc. which are very inexpensive to create.  Once you can create the light you want with lamps, sunlight, and foamcore you will be ready to worry about more advanced lighting equipment.  there is a ton of experimentation to find what works for you.  Building on others' ideas and work help to accelerate this path (vs. random/blind experimentation), but it is the experimentation which I find to be the most fun and the most rewarding.

David Kirk wrote:

You seem to have absolutely the right attitude.  Listen to others' ideas regarding composition and framing, but trust your instincts and experiment until you find what works for you.

In terms of lighting, I found starting with the classics was very helpful and seemed to fit into my own preferences.  With a single lamp you can experiment with the placements of it to create split, Rembrandt, butterfly/paramount in both broad and short lighting.  There are lots of articles on the web which describe these various portrait lighting schemes.  I found it helpful to re-create these patterns literally and then experiment from there to discover what I like and how I feel it presents the subject.

I also agree that there is no need to spend money on expensive equipment.  My first lighting purchase was a reflector and stand to use with window portraits.  I still use it today, but also have other reflectors made from foamcore etc. which are very inexpensive to create.  Once you can create the light you want with lamps, sunlight, and foamcore you will be ready to worry about more advanced lighting equipment.  there is a ton of experimentation to find what works for you.  Building on others' ideas and work help to accelerate this path (vs. random/blind experimentation), but it is the experimentation which I find to be the most fun and the most rewarding.

Oh awesome. I ADORE your lighting, so I'll definitely follow your advice and do some googling to try and replicate those different lighting styles. I have watched a video or two on the basics of lighting, but there's so, so much to learn.

Thanks guys! I feel like I just walked into a bookstore with a question about a topic of interest and walked out with 7 different books to devour. I'll report back with more images as I take them and learn more.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Y'know -- I can critique a photographer who is trying to create a portrait, but I'm not sure how to critique a model.  So, apologies in advance -- most of what I have to say is probably directed towards your photographer.

I don't like the portrait.  The model/OP is lovely, but the picture misses the mark for me.  Specifically, here are some things I like to see in a photographic portrait:

...  Action -- as in what's happening.  I also like to imagine what happened before & after the exposure was
     made.

...  Expression -- this image just seems to be an attractive girl staring at a camera's lens, waiting for the guy
     to press the shutter release.  And a word of caution:  we can usually tell when a model's expression is
     genuine or faked.

...  Relationship -- how do the model & photographer relate to each other.  What is their relationship?

...  Environment -- Let's get a sense of where you are located, and how does the environment relate to or
     contribute to the portrait?

The preceding is my opinion, of course, and I'm pretty particular.  One thing I can say is that I strongly prefer eye contact in portraits, and you did well here.  (I hate so-called "candids" because they are "cheap", as in the photographers risk nothing.  If you want a good portrait, start with a good interaction with your photographer.

One final hint -- if this kind of posing makes you uncomfortable, try holding something in your hands -- it helps a lot.

I'm not the model, I'm the photographer. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

T A Y L O R  wrote:
I'm not the model, I'm the photographer. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

Sorry -- I was misled -- your avatar shows up as "model".

T A Y L O R  wrote:
You guys were immensely helpful last time I posted something, and I would love any and all feedback. I'm completely and utterly new at photography. I have yet to invest in anything other than a kit lens, so I recognize that this isn't the best lens for portraiture. I don't want to invest in more gear until I'm killing it with what I have now, and I know I'm not killing it. Thoughts on lighting, composition, photoshop, and anything else that stands out? Thank you in advance!

Not a fan of the composition, the blurry thing at the bottom, plus the fact you severed off the top of the head. Too many catch lights, remove the smaller ones so there is just one [Most of us live on Earth, and we have just one sun so far. So if there is more than one catch light it can bother our senses]
Over all color seems off
Would rather see this as a vertical composition

Wish you well

Light and Lens Studio wrote:
Well, sorry, but it's a busy day and I'm just going to cut to the chase without all the flowery, politically correct stuff.

The EXIF data has been removed from the image, so I can't tell what lens was used, the exposure, ISO, etc.

Just a few things bother me as far as technique:

1. Distortion.  It appears that this may have been shot with a short focal length lens, as the model's face seems distorted.  There were a couple of threads recently in the photography forum regarding the effect of focal length on perspective and distortion.
2. There is noise.  In the 'film days' sometimes we shot with film with a high ISO to get grain (the equivalent of noise in digital photos).  Some of the technophiles might go nuts over it.  It's noticeable, but not all that objectionable in this portrait.
3. I personally prefer the warm tones to the colder ones.  That's just a personal preference.  There is no absolute "right" color balance unless you are mucking around in a laboratory.  Absolutes are for science and even then there are few of them.
4. Focus.  The focal plane seems to be on the lips.  The eyes are not sharply focused.  This bothers me, but may not bother others.  The previously mentioned triple highlights in the eyes are easily correct with photoshop, but they are a little of a distraction.
5. Foreign Matter.  The green fuzzy object at the bottom and a part of a circular object in the upper right are distractions that can be avoided.  It take a number of years for most photographers to become keenly aware of backgrounds and objects that really shouldn't belong in the picture.  There is also something that is distracting in the lower right corner.  It's not the same pattern as the dress and the dress then makes a rim above it.  Minor point, but probably worth mentioning.
6. Skin Texture.  Personally I like it 1000 times better than the over photoshopped, plastic, textureless, painted on BS that is so prevalent today.  I'm not opposed to photoshop by any means.  But, face it, we humans do have skin texture, complexion, or whatever you want to call it.  The lighting in this photo, though, does emphasize the texture of the models skin.  That might bother some folks.

My apology if I've been too direct or blunt.

Keep at it.  It's still a lot better than a lot of stuff you see in some people's ports here on MM.  With your great attitude, I predict you will excel.

Oh wow, not too blunt at all! That's all super helpful, thank you! I didn't mean to remove the EXIF data, so I'll need to check my settings and see how to leave that in. Nothing a quick google search shouldn't fix. I do tend to prefer noise in my images, so I tend to ratchet up the ISO. Personal preference, since I also tend to like shooting on film. I play with lower ISO's as well for variety. Focus - I find it a lot more difficult to focus my kit lens on the DSLR than to focus my 50 mm on my film lens. I often forget about setting my focus points (probably also because I haven't used this camera in like a year...). Very good to keep in mind. Thank you, thank you!

Lee_Photography wrote:

Not a fan of the composition, the blurry thing at the bottom, plus the fact you severed off the top of the head. Too many catch lights, remove the smaller ones so there is just one [Most of us live on Earth, and we have just one sun so far. So if there is more than one catch light it can bother our senses]
Over all color seems off
Would rather see this as a vertical composition

Wish you well

Hahaha, it's good to know that if I ever want to do a sci-fi shoot, I can just add more catch lights. Thanks, I'll definitely play with all that. Vertical composition is a good tip.