Halloween C&C: Questions!

[ssnxp]

This was my first "model" shoot, very improvised. All shots were in a dorm hall. Terrible lighting, and the only things I had were my 50D and 28-135mm. I know these shots are BAD, I'm looking for some advice on HOW I could (if at all possible) I could have made these decent shots; IE where to put lighting, if I need an off camera flash, etc. Anything would help! Also, I know some of the shots are a little blurry; I was too worried about the lighting and totally forgot to worry about camera shake. I'm almost too embarrassed to post these, but I know I won't learn if I don't get some criticism.

1. With a flash. Very washed out, I think.. And the hallway behind her is way too bright. I tried turning up the shutter speed in other shots to light her up, but keep the hallway dark, but the highest the shutter would go was 250!
28mm f/3.5 1/100s

2. No flash. She's way too dark here..
28mm f/3.5 1/50s

3. With flash, in the elevator. Flash bounced off of the metal walls and wreaked havoc with the picture.
28mm f/3.5 1/20s

4. No flash. Her face is way underexposed. How could I have given her face/body some light without lighting up the entire scene?
28mm f/3.5 1/20s

Any C&C (and even gear recommendation) is greatly appreciated! Also, all of these were shot in JPEG, no PP.

 

[KenL]

Here is your last image, Post-Processed. PP can make up for a lot.......

 

[ssnxp]

Thanks! I know PP can do quite a bit, but I'm trying to get at least "decent" shots before I start messing around with PP. Thanks for the edit.

 

[Inst!nct]

@KenL

I felt thats a bit drastic? its halloween and its light up a little too much, id ont have lightroom on this laptop, so i cant edit it, but maybe more gloomy was better?

 

[redtippmann]

You should be able to go more than 1/250 (well my d2h can't) but allot of cameras can get around 1/500. And was it in high flash sync? And was the flash off camera? If it wasn't you really shoud think about getting some cactus triggers( or pocket wizards if you can) and get the flash off to the side. I only have one flash but I use a car winshield reflector to bounce back some light. And post processing can always help.

 

[TJ K]

Here is your last image, Post-Processed. PP can make up for a lot.......

Sorry but that edit is pretty bad. There are plenty of things you could do in PP but thats not how I would do it. I either wouldn't use that pic or try to save it w/out letting the quality become horrible.

 

[KenL]

Here is your last image, Post-Processed. PP can make up for a lot.......

Sorry but that edit is pretty bad. There are plenty of things you could do in PP but thats not how I would do it. I either wouldn't use that pic or try to save it w/out letting the quality become horrible.

If you see horrible quality, it is either your monitor or your eyes. And, this was about how I would do it, not you.

If you have an edited image to share, just do it without feeling as though you need to find fault with the work of others.

 

[Felix0890]

If you see horrible quality, it is either your monitor or your eyes. And, this was about how I would do it, not you.

If you have an edited image to share, just do it without feeling as though you need to find fault with the work of others.

Ummm it's not his eyes or monitor. No offense, but you took a bad exposure and turned it into a worse one . . . photoshop is great but it's not going to fix exposures that are bad to begin with. At least not all.

As for the OP, you need to work on getting proper exposures without a flash before you can start using it (just my opinion). Your no-flash exposure are generally underexposed. The ones with flash are washed out like you said. I can't give much tips on the use of flash because I'm more of an ambient light person for now.

 

[TJ K]

Here is your last image, Post-Processed. PP can make up for a lot.......

Sorry but that edit is pretty bad. There are plenty of things you could do in PP but thats not how I would do it. I either wouldn't use that pic or try to save it w/out letting the quality become horrible.

If you see horrible quality, it is either your monitor or your eyes. And, this was about how I would do it, not you.

If you have an edited image to share, just do it without feeling as though you need to find fault with the work of others.

Monitor is fine and last I checked about a month ago i'm 20/20. Don't post the picture if it's just about how you would do it. You posted it because you wanted the OP to see it and everyone else and you most likely expected everyone to love it, but it just made the photo worse. I don't have an edited image to share because I understand that the image had a pretty bad exposure to start and trying some PP will only make it worse. I also understand my skill level and don't go posting an edited picture and thinking it's so amazing that I should tell everyone that doesn't agree my PP work is flawless that there eyes must be messed up or something is wrong with there monitor.

 

[ssnxp]

Thanks for the responses guys, so what SHOULD I have done, slowed down the shutter speed?

Also, I don't have an external flash unit, let alone an off camera one. All I had was the pop up flash.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Monitor is fine and last I checked about a month ago i'm 20/20. Don't post the picture if it's just about how you would do it. You posted it because you wanted the OP to see it and everyone else and you most likely expected everyone to love it, but it just made the photo worse. I don't have an edited image to share because I understand that the image had a pretty bad exposure to start and trying some PP will only make it worse. I also understand my skill level and don't go posting an edited picture and thinking it's so amazing that I should tell everyone that doesn't agree my PP work is flawless that there eyes must be messed up or something is wrong with there monitor.

This is why I love this place soooooooo much.
Ken was just trying to help out, which is bucket loads more than your drivel has done. :thumbup:

 

[fokker]

I have to agree with felix and TJ K that the processed image looks worse...

 

[TylerF]

well i figured i would try my hand at PP. here's what i came up with without it being too overly proccessed

 

[Felix0890]

Ken was just trying to help out, which is bucket loads more than your drivel has done. :thumbup:

Oh yes Ken was very helpful. He kindly demonstrated to the OP that you cannot turn dirt into gold (or silver . . . . or bronze . . .).

Seriously, I get he was trying to help but I find it a bit cocky that after screwing something up that bad and someone pointing it out, he states that it must be the person's eyes or monitor. :er:

Tyler, that's a much better job at fixing it. It's still not a great image but it's way better than the original or the over-PPed butchered version.

 

[bigtwinky]

#1 You cut off her foot and leg and you also chose to have her head in the middle of the frame.

#2 has similar issues in that she is really tight on the left side, cut off on the frame and you cut off her left leg.

#3 is better, you didn't cut off any major body parts, but you left alot of head room on top of her head. Get in closer. You also seem to have missed the focus, she seems blurry

#4 probably the better composed shot, she fills up the frame decently and you have her body in a way that angles are shaped and formed.

When you say with flash, what flash are you using? Your popup flash or an actual mounted flash? If using a mounted flash, look into bouncing the flash off walls and ceilings so you arent just blasting her head on (such as you did in photo 1).

You can try properly exposing for the background, set the mounted flash to TTL (or adjust exposure manually) and use your flash to fill in the light.

Read up on strobist info Strobist: Lighting 101 to get a better idea of how flash and lights work.