It's a new year and I've ditched a popular art website in-favor of getting more serious about my work. If I'm going to have my port critiqued, I want it to come from Photogs, Models, MUAs, and others in-the-know.
The target is on me. What works? How so? What is too n00b? How do I correct?
Hopefully, you can rip my heart out and destroy my work...but in the case of yours....
Images are generally flat and washed out with strobe light, causing a lack of depth/dimension.
The only image that works for me (and only because of the presence of contrast or some semblance of dynamic range) is an 18+ image
http://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/31161869 Most porn sites like the whole washed out with light thing, as no naughty bits are hidden for paying clients to gawk at. That's what most of your work reminds me of.
My bad I would suggest using your model lamp on your strobe and discover where the shadows are before you press that trigger and your work will come to life.
Hope that helps mate.
intense_puppy wrote: For what it's worth - I like this one. It's got a dreamy feel to it:
The pregnancy one seems out of place in your port though:
Have a great day
Awesome! Thanks for the input. My work in natural lighting really changed-up how I thought about pushing my work forward. Call it ego - part of me doesn't want to let go of the maternity shot because it was the first listing I go. Down the line, it will go.
Glenn Hall - Fine Art wrote: Hopefully, you can rip my heart out and destroy my work...but in the case of yours....
Images are generally flat and washed out with strobe light, causing a lack of depth/dimension.
The only image that works for me (and only because of the presence of contrast or some semblance of dynamic range) is an 18+ image
http://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/31161869 Most porn sites like the whole washed out with light thing, as no naughty bits are hidden for paying clients to gawk at. That's what most of your work reminds me of.
My bad I would suggest using your model lamp on your strobe and discover where the shadows are before you press that trigger and your work will come to life.
Hope that helps mate.
Doubt-it - I'm the suggestive type for "what I would like to see..." as opposed to "I'm a ???? and ????? ????? and your work does nothing for me" type. There is a part of me deep inside that wants to see every part of the model highlighted and detailed, but I needed to hear from the pros that it's not necessary. I'm slowly progressing in lighting kits so that I can practice a little more for lighting, now that I know I can work with sunlight. Let's just say that 3-4 rounds of 3min shooting in a group setting hasn't allowed for much practice aside from 5 test shots.
I think the lighting is pretty good when you consider the location is a hotel room?
Hotel room and alley garage seems to be most of the work....that might hinder some llamas from signing on board.
The llamas you have found are beautiful.
So.....San Jose, next to San Francisco, so many interesting outdoor locations with beautiful west coast light and a bohemian spirit.....there are no limits to the creativity you can produce!
Rik Williams
Posts: 2,285
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
You need to work on your lighting and cropping first and foremost.
The first two images in your port are the only ones I can give credit to.
The rest are flat and poorly processed.
This...
however, runs a close second to the first two, but fails in the cropping of the feet.
Work the light, work your models and learn more about post process would be the advice I'd give you.
Eyesso wrote: I think the lighting is pretty good when you consider the location is a hotel room?
Hotel room and alley garage seems to be most of the work....that might hinder some models from signing on board.
The models you have found are beautiful.
So.....San Jose, next to San Francisco, so many interesting outdoor locations with beautiful west coast light and a bohemian spirit.....there are no limits to the creativity you can produce!
Diversify
In the 6 months that I've been shooting portraits, I've been keeping to group photoshoots so, "yes", hotel rooms have been the norm. My first (denoted "High Fashion") was a garage with white backdrop and my latest ("MotofoX" and "VTwin Bombshell") was behind a motorcycle shop.
I have yet to do an outdoor shoot with any of the groups, but the fault does lie with me for being either too picky or having a conflicting schedule. Ergo, I want to diversify the port in the new year, with less outright nudes and more "interesting" pieces.
I would say you are starting on the right track. Some of the images you use good light, shadows, in contrast that are shot inside. It seems that you are able to control the light better inside. As for the outside images they seem to be flat. When shooting outside if you don't have any lighting equipment use a reflector or even some white foamcore to help you bounce light. Also shoot when the sun is not so high in the sky. Shoot when there is an overcast, sunsut, sunrise, cloudy. Know your angles as well use a 3 point perspective when shooting and that will help your images have a better composition as well.
Rik Image wrote: You need to work on your lighting and cropping first and foremost.
The first two images in your port are the only ones I can give credit to.
The rest are flat and poorly processed.
This...
however, runs a close second to the first two, but fails in the cropping of the feet.
Work the light, work your models and learn more about post process would be the advice I'd give you.
Got it.
That makes two in-favor of natural lighting. Ironically, of the 1.5k shots I took that day in 2hrs, it yielded a 10% of what I considered "decent images."
Any recommendations for what would be a good source for post processing? I've been stuck looking towards YouTube photoshop vids, but they don't feel specific enough for what I need in portrait work.
Dontez Akins wrote: I would say you are starting on the right track. Some of the images you use good light, shadows, in contrast that are shot inside. It seems that you are able to control the light better inside. As for the outside images they seem to be flat. When shooting outside if you don't have any lighting equipment use a reflector or even some white foamcore to help you bounce light. Also shoot when the sun is not so high in the sky. Shoot when there is an overcast, sunset, sunrise, cloudy. Know your angles as well use a 3 point perspective when shooting and that will help your images have a better composition as well.
Agreed for timing on with sunlight - the "Sweet Sexiness" set was taken in early summer afternoon so it was perfect for lighting an entire wall of slidingdoor/window. By contrast, "MotofoX" was late morning so I need to learn how to manage it better. Thanks for the response!
intense_puppy
Posts: 832
Brighton, England, United Kingdom
A Preppy Photography wrote: I've been stuck looking towards YouTube photoshop vids, but they don't feel specific enough for what I need in portrait work.
What do you need specifically?
For example - In photoshop I use the healing brush, curves, d&b and nothing else. But that's very specific to my work on film (Ie. I can't use liquify, cloning, layer distortions, resizing, etc because of the grain - or do too much colour work for that matter).
So what I'm saying is that it totally depends on the effect you're after - I guess once you clarify that, the post processing techniques you need should be obvious.
intense_puppy wrote: What do you need specifically?
For example - In photoshop I use the healing brush, curves, d&b and nothing else. But that's very specific to my work on film (Ie. I can't use liquify, cloning, layer distortions, resizing, etc because of the grain - or do too much colour work for that matter).
So what I'm saying is that it totally depends on the effect you're after - I guess once you clarify that, the post processing techniques you need should be obvious.
I think what it boils down to it "how much is too much" healing or highlighting in a shot. Healing Brush and Patch Tool I have down, and I'm pretty comfortable with layering blurred skin. So I would probably say Curves might be my weakness. D&B? Can't say I'm familiar with that one.
In retrospect, I think my work needs more "pop" and dynamic colors instead of how I've been washing-out everything.
I would stay away from the blur tool if you want a more accurate read get the portraiture plug-in for Photoshop it works wonders its more accurate then the blur tool on still keeping images to look realistic instead of losing the detail of the skin
intense_puppy
Posts: 832
Brighton, England, United Kingdom
A Preppy Photography wrote: D&B? Can't say I'm familiar with that one.
In retrospect, I think my work needs more "pop" and dynamic colors instead of how I've been washing-out everything.
D&B stands for dodge and burn (selectively boosting the contrast - I mostly use it to make details like hair "pop" out and artificially deepen existing shadows, etc)
Sounds like you know what you want. Personally I learn by experimenting, so if you want my advice I would do some experiments with a single picture - say go for a retro colour look then a brutal cross processed/oversaturated look then play around with it in monochrome, etc.
Plenty of tutorials out there for those specific looks (or start hanging out on the retouching board here).
Dontez Akins wrote: I would stay away from the blur tool if you want a more accurate read get the portraiture plug-in for Photoshop it works wonders its more accurate then the blur tool on still keeping images to look realistic instead of losing the detail of the skin
Portraiture Plug-In? Did not know about that one! Awesome! Will make a note of it. So far, I've been using adjustment layers for blurring the skin (albeit gently) but it has been a pain to erase everything that isn't skin.
intense_puppy wrote: D&B stands for dodge and burn (selectively boosting the contrast - I mostly use it to make details like hair "pop" out and artificially deepen existing shadows, etc)
Sounds like you know what you want. Personally I learn by experimenting, so if you want my advice I would do some experiments with a single picture - say go for a retro colour look then a brutal cross processed/oversaturated look then play around with it in monochrome, etc.
Plenty of tutorials out there for those specific looks.
In that case, D&B would be another thing I could use some lessons in to add depth. I'll definitely have to give the extremes a shot, at least to get an idea of the paths instead of staying bland.
I figured making a new thread would just take-up more space than necessary, so I'm reviving this one for the sake of progressive critiquing. In the time since, I've had three new shoots so there isn't much for me to brag about.
To-date, I've only kept three images in the port, adding 21 new pics yesterday after joining the Premium ranks. In every shoot since, I've always kept everyone's thoughts at the forefront of my mind - avoid flat colors, more depth, less light, improve cropping. Still haven't moved away from hotels as my mind keeps going towards "Boudoir" and less outdoor/studio Vogue/Esquire/etc, and still need work on my Post-Processing.
Any thoughts on the recent updates? Improved? Not so much?
Can I be completely honest with you?
It feels GWC to me. You enjoy your hobby to see beautiful women in lingerie/naked.
Even your profile sends that vibe a bit:
"I enjoy shooting Lingerie and Implied Nudes most because they have a tease factor leaving you wanting more" (Oh I bet you enjoy them.)
"I am a talker behind the camera, to break the monotony of silence and keep active in shoots. Honest compliments will be provided profusely." (Models don't need that, might come off creepy on a professional set)
Now, I'm not saying you are a GWC or any of the above is true. I'm just saying how you might be perceived by others. And before you throw a hissy fit, information on how you're perceived is very useful.
Axioma wrote: Can I be completely honest with you?
It feels GWC to me. You enjoy your hobby to see beautiful women in lingerie/naked.
Even your profile sends that vibe a bit:
"I enjoy shooting Lingerie and Implied Nudes most because they have a tease factor leaving you wanting more" (Oh I bet you enjoy them.)
"I am a talker behind the camera, to break the monotony of silence and keep active in shoots. Honest compliments will be provided profusely." (Models don't need that, might come off creepy on a professional set)
Now, I'm not saying you are a GWC or any of the above is true. I'm just saying how you might be perceived by others. And before you throw a hissy fit, information on how you're perceived is very useful.
Thanks for the feedback. I'm always afraid that I do come-off as GWC b/c I never started-out in the art field like most, taking classes in HS/College and knowing what defines "art" from the mainstream "sexy for cash". As a hobby, it helps to detract from my 9-5 retail job, so being around non-customers is always nice.
I'll make sure to revise the profile a little. Thought I had too little yesterday, but maybe it's TMI.
| 
| 
| edu