Casino Promotional Photos C&C

[Brinr]

I have been working with a Casino here in Reno, NV and and advertising agency. Let me know what you think.

#1


8_24_11 Reno Montage 035 dice water by Brinr, on Flickr

#2


8_24_11 Reno Montage 025 Vignett water by Brinr, on Flickr

#3


8_24_11 Reno Montage 023 water by Brinr, on Flickr

[TPF Sponsor]

[IgsEMT]

In 1&2 lighting sux. Flat and boring. On num1 turn the bottom dice a bit thus give it some 3G structure.
In number 2 the dice is in empty space - again boring.
Num3 is a great shot. Emotional, exciting, a reason to come into casino.

[Brinr]

thanks Igs, I agree on composition of the two dice pics. How would you have changed the lighting?

[andrewleephoto]

thanks Igs, I agree on composition of the two dice pics. How would you have changed the lighting?

If you have an external flash, try bouncing it off of the ceiling. It should help a lot!

[cgipson1]

thanks Igs, I agree on composition of the two dice pics. How would you have changed the lighting?

If you have an external flash, try bouncing it off of the ceiling. It should help a lot!

Most Casino ceilings are really high.. that probably wont work. Based on the softness of the shadows, I would say the the OP already has the light diffused... although that could be a function of the translucent dice.

[cgipson1]

#2 - did you 3/4 backlight the dice on purpose? Just looks odd to me with the shadows coming toward the viewer. I think some shadow component is needed for this shot, but side lighting, or 3/4 frontal may have been better... don't know, would have to see it. It does put a nice highlight IN the dice.. but just looks off to me.

[Brinr]

Hey ya'll. Ya I definitely went off camera flash with this one, I had a 580ex ii and a shoot through umbrella so bounce flash off the ceiling wouldn't have really been the optimum use of my flash. Besides the ceiling was a little too high. As far as back lighting the dice in #2 I guess it just gives a nice "snoot" or concentrated beam of light affect, which probably could have been achieved with the light at side or 3/4. Thanks for the comments!

[photobykelly]

I would have to agree that shot #1 and #2 are a little boring, however shot #3 was done well. Nice job

[JTHphoto]

#1 not really working for me either. i can see #2 working for certain applications, i like the dof. #3 is definitely a winner. nice work!

[Nu2This]

I think the addition of chips would add a lot more color and interest to the shots and help out the second shot in particular. Agree that number 3 is really good.

[JMBriggs]

IMO your watermark is so huge that's all I can look at. Might want to downsize it by 50% or so. That and it is blocking the view of the table in #3 so it's hard to tell it's in a casino. I really like #1 btw... I think the lighting looks fine, but I'm just a noob.

[shootermcgavin]

IMO your watermark is so huge that's all I can look at. Might want to downsize it by 50% or so. That and it is blocking the view of the table in #3 so it's hard to tell it's in a casino. I really like #1 btw... I think the lighting looks fine, but I'm just a noob.

I have to agree a little, also the backwards R draws my attention cuz I just don't get the reason for it. Anyway 3 looks right out of a magazine so great shot. I would've photographed a big stack of chips, I don't think dice, or cards, or anything other than a big stack of chips when I gamble. A couple more hotties around the guys would have been a nice touch too... ha ha

[Rotanimod]

IMO your watermark is so huge that's all I can look at. Might want to downsize it by 50% or so. That and it is blocking the view of the table in #3 so it's hard to tell it's in a casino. I really like #1 btw... I think the lighting looks fine, but I'm just a noob.

IMO your watermark is so huge that's all I can look at. Might want to downsize it by 50% or so. That and it is blocking the view of the table in #3 so it's hard to tell it's in a casino. I really like #1 btw... I think the lighting looks fine, but I'm just a noob.

I have to agree a little, also the backwards R draws my attention cuz I just don't get the reason for it. Anyway 3 looks right out of a magazine so great shot. I would've photographed a big stack of chips, I don't think dice, or cards, or anything other than a big stack of chips when I gamble. A couple more hotties around the guys would have been a nice touch too... ha ha

I've mentioned this before in another of your posts. Your logo is overbearing and not aesthetic whatsoever.

I like 1 for DoF and 3 for great subject capture. 2 doesn't work.

[Tee]

IMO your watermark is so huge that's all I can look at.

That was my first thought and then realized that pic would look good as one side of a business card.

[tirediron]

C&C per req:

1. It's a picture of a pair of dice. Full stop. There's nothing interesting, nothing that draws me in... The name on the dice is only clearly legible in the upper die, and then is small enough not to be immediately obvious. I think had this been shot with a more focused background, it might have worked better.

2. IMO, this one totally misses. What's the point? I can't tell what it's advertising. As someone who knows very little about gambling, it does nothing to attract me, nor does it give any indication of which casino is being advertised. I'm not fond of the foreground die being so OOF.

3. This is the strongest of the three, but still needs work IMO. It's not clear what they are doing or where they are. Had you moved further camera right and included some of the table surface and something in the background with the casino's name. This image also suffers from some perspective issues. Ensure you have your camera level and square to avoid the background angles.

Overall, I think you're going in the right direction, but I don't think there's enough interest in the images; try including more paraphernalia such as cards, chips, etc.

Just my $00.02 worth - your mileage may vary.

~John