Looking for C&C Thank you!

Connor Hibbs · Feb 23, 2015

Hey there everyone! So I was out with my girlfriend running some errands in what was about a foot of snow when we passed by a golf course. I felt inspired to take out my camera and snap a few shots. With the wind-chill it was about -10 degrees out so it was a rather rushed shoot snapping about 15 photos, but I got what I think are a few good ones out of it.

I am working on training my eye to see the areas in which I need improvement, and I am sure this shot could use some too, but I am in need of some other eyes to review and critique.
I hope you are all having a wonderful day! Happy shooting and thanks for the comments in advance!!

Forkie · Feb 23, 2015

The exposure is pretty good here and the snow seems to have provided a decent amount of reflection because you've manage to avoid the dreaded racoon eyes.

My only criticism would be in the composition. There are a lot of people here who say you should shoot portraits in portrait orientation, but I'm not one of those.

I will say though, that when shooting horizontal portraits, the composition needs to be much more dynamic than this shot. Your girlfriend's (who is very pretty, by the way

) pose is very static and unimaginative. With such a flat white background, something else needs to take the attention and even asking your model to stand so that she's not square shouldered to the camera and turn her head towards you can make all the difference. Even cropping in a bit tighter could make it more dramatic.

You've followed the rule of thirds, which is good, but that big black tree trunk in the background throws the composition off-balance. If it was removed completely or even a bit further left, it would have felt much more complete. Negative (empty) space will balance out a horizontal portrait like this, but after seeing your girlfriend, my eye goes straight to that tree-trunk and it brings nothing else to the shot. Therefore, it is redundant and shouldn't be there.

Overall though, technically it's really good. You're almost there. Take her back out and have another go!

It says your photo are OK to edit, so just to demonstrate the difference without the tree (quick and dirty edit):

Now all the attention is on her. And it feels much more balanced. I did try different crops, but actually, the original crop does work best for this. If her pose was a bit more dynamic, I think we could have pulled more interest out of it by strategic cropping

.

Designer · Feb 23, 2015

The WB is off.

Also; reported duplicate thread.

KmH · Feb 23, 2015

I agree about turning the camera to the portrait orientation rather than using the cinematic/landscape framing.
Particularly if your intent is to have the background out of focus.

I disagree on the exposure and think the subject is somewhat under exposed, that the light quality is less than flattering to the subject, and that a subject to background lighting ratio would add separation from the background and would add 'pop' to the subject.

I too find the photo to warm. With the proper white balance the snow and her teeth would be white instead of a light shade of tan.

Connor Hibbs · Feb 23, 2015

Forkie said:
The exposure is pretty good here and the snow seems to have provided a decent amount of reflection because you've manage to avoid the dreaded racoon eyes.

My only criticism would be in the composition. There are a lot of people here who say you should shoot portraits in portrait orientation, but I'm not one of those.

I will say though, that when shooting horizontal portraits, the composition needs to be much more dynamic than this shot. Your girlfriend's (who is very pretty, by the way ) pose is very static and unimaginative. With such a flat white background, something else needs to take the attention and even asking your model to stand so that she's not square shouldered to the camera and turn her head towards you can make all the difference. Even cropping in a bit tighter could make it more dramatic.

You've followed the rule of thirds, which is good, but that big black tree trunk in the background throws the composition off-balance. If it was removed completely or even a bit further left, it would have felt much more complete. Negative (empty) space will balance out a horizontal portrait like this, but after seeing your girlfriend, my eye goes straight to that tree-trunk and it brings nothing else to the shot. Therefore, it is redundant and shouldn't be there.

Overall though, technically it's really good. You're almost there. Take her back out and have another go!

It says your photo are OK to edit, so just to demonstrate the difference without the tree (quick and dirty edit):
View attachment 95920

Now all the attention is on her. And it feels much more balanced. I did try different crops, but actually, the original crop does work best for this. If her pose was a bit more dynamic, I think we could have pulled more interest out of it by strategic cropping .

Forkie, Thank you very much for your well thought out response! It proved to be quite helpful!
I absolutely agree that the pose is a bit static and unimaginative. I actually had her in a different pose for the majority of the shots with her body less square and head turned towards me. I was also shooting in a portrait orientation for most of the shots. The only problem being when she put her hood it covered her face so she turned towards me. So I'll just say I agree completely, but couldn't figure out the solution while in the freezing cold moment. I just liked the smile I captured with this one even though it was more spur of the moment and not composed quite the same as the other shots I took.

When it comes to the tree, WOW that quick edit to remove it just totally improved things.
I was debating walking out past the trees to shoot, but as I was shooting sort of spur of the moment and it was so very cold, I didn't take the time to do what I should have. Lesson learned there for next time. I will definitely have to pay more attention to distracting background elements in the future.

Again, thank you so much for the critique!

Connor Hibbs · Feb 23, 2015

KmH said:
I agree about turning the camera to the portrait orientation rather than using the cinematic/landscape framing.
Particularly if your intent is to have the background out of focus.

I disagree on the exposure and think the subject is somewhat under exposed, that the light quality is less than flattering to the subject, and that a subject to background lighting ratio would add separation from the background and would add 'pop' to the subject.

I too find the photo to warm. With the proper white balance the snow and her teeth would be white instead of a light shade of tan.

I agree. After sleeping for the night and coming back to look at this I also think it is a tad under exposed here.
By subject to background lighting ratio do you mean I should have enhanced the lighting a bit on her by adding some extra fill light or maybe a rim? Unfortunately I didn't have my reflectors or flashes with me as I only had my camera in a little day pack.

The photo is definitely a bit too warm. I don't know what I was thinking, it looked good to my unrested eyes last night! haha
Thank you for your comments KmH! I really do appreciate it!

Connor Hibbs · Feb 23, 2015

Forkie said:
The exposure is pretty good here and the snow seems to have provided a decent amount of reflection because you've manage to avoid the dreaded racoon eyes.

My only criticism would be in the composition. There are a lot of people here who say you should shoot portraits in portrait orientation, but I'm not one of those.

I will say though, that when shooting horizontal portraits, the composition needs to be much more dynamic than this shot. Your girlfriend's (who is very pretty, by the way ) pose is very static and unimaginative. With such a flat white background, something else needs to take the attention and even asking your model to stand so that she's not square shouldered to the camera and turn her head towards you can make all the difference. Even cropping in a bit tighter could make it more dramatic.

You've followed the rule of thirds, which is good, but that big black tree trunk in the background throws the composition off-balance. If it was removed completely or even a bit further left, it would have felt much more complete. Negative (empty) space will balance out a horizontal portrait like this, but after seeing your girlfriend, my eye goes straight to that tree-trunk and it brings nothing else to the shot. Therefore, it is redundant and shouldn't be there.

Overall though, technically it's really good. You're almost there. Take her back out and have another go!

It says your photo are OK to edit, so just to demonstrate the difference without the tree (quick and dirty edit):
View attachment 95920

Now all the attention is on her. And it feels much more balanced. I did try different crops, but actually, the original crop does work best for this. If her pose was a bit more dynamic, I think we could have pulled more interest out of it by strategic cropping .

Oh also! While I did indeed have her in a different pose for the majority of the shooting I did with her, I am still working on my posing techniques. Are you aware of any particularly good books or tutorials on posing techniques? I am definitely improving (Not evident in this shot) with it, but have yet to find any really great resources on the matter.

Forkie · Feb 23, 2015

Actually, I'm not very aware of any books that talk about posing. Maybe someone else will know some. Loads of books on portrait lighting, etc, but just posing? Not sure.

For headshots, I can recommend watching some of Peter Hurley's videos: peter hurley the art behind the headshot - YouTube

But I'm afraid I don't have much more than that - I've mostly got my techniques through trial and error and practicing with friends in front of the camera!

The_Traveler · Mar 3, 2015

With that background lots can be done simply.
Copied the trees, flipped them and shortened the trunks.
Removed that real magenta cast.
Still looks unreal, maybe too much smoothing?

Connor Hibbs · Mar 4, 2015

The_Traveler said:
With that background lots can be done simply.
Copied the trees, flipped them and shortened the trunks.
Removed that real magenta cast.
Still looks unreal, maybe too much smoothing?

View attachment 96417

Wow! I love the edit to did with this, I will have to start messing around with similar techniques.

Can you clarify what you mean when you suggest there may be too much smoothing? Do you mean with her skin?

Thank you for the response! It definitely gave me ideas about how to clean up a messy background that I hadn't thought about.

The_Traveler · Mar 4, 2015

The fur and her hair all look hyper-sharp, almost unnaturally so, yet, to me, the skin on her face has a bit of a plastic too-smooth, too perfect look.