2nd Glamour shot

[rexbobcat]

These are more like beauty shots instead of glamour.

Glamour, by what I know, is more sexualized either discreetly or overtly while beauty focused a lot on the face and features of the person being photographed.

Fashion is, a lot of the time, glamour.

Those CoverGirl ads in magazines where it shows Drew Barrymore or whoever smiling with a makeup product on her face is beauty.

These are similar to the latter I think.

 

[sandrat]

Better, BUT.... your camera will still work when turned 90 degrees counter-clockwise! Honest! And, interestingly enough, that is called "portrait" oreintation!



The focuse seems to have missed on this one as well. The hair on her head appears sharp, but the face & eyes seem a tad soft. That might be this monitor however. I'm a little puzzled by your light placement; what sort of lighting were you going for? When you're new to off-camera lighting, I recommend starting small. Use a single light, high and right, with a nice big softbox/umbrella, and then a big reflector at the oppposite shoulder. Not the most exiting lighting, but it will work. Your second light would have been MUCH better employed as either a background or rimlight to provide some separation, and lastly, while you've "embodied" the head here, we don't know whose harnds those are. If you'd used a portrait orientation you could have included her arms, and the image would have been, IMO, much stronger.

Just my $00.02 worth - your mileage may vary.

~John

John,

Thanks for the detailed critique... Never crossed my mind to shoot portrait on these and connect the arms to the body - makes sense. On the light not sure exactly what I was going for other than to see if I could get some catch lights to show up. Facing photo one umbrella high to right at 45 degrees, 2nd umbrella low left pointing up at her. Speedlights were a 2 to 1 ratio. You can see in eyes if you zoom - Clamshell I guess?

I have a 3rd matching speedlight that I could use maybe to separate the background? Was a small room so getting distance between her and background woulda been difficult.

Definitely will shoot some portrait orientation!

 

[sandrat]

Rexbobcat

Agreed beauty it is!

 

[kundalini]

Here's a good tutorial from Benji. Consummate professional and all around nice guy.

The Rules Of Good Portraiture

 

[pixmedic1 1]

I like this one better as well. :thumbup::thumbup:

 

[sandrat]

Here's a good tutorial from Benji. Consummate professional and all around nice guy.

The Rules Of Good Portraiture

Hey thanks.... Reading now good stuff

 

[kathyt]

Glamour my ass.

You could be a little bit nicer since the holidays are approaching. Geez.

 

[kundalini]

Glamour my ass.

You could be a little bit nicer since the holidays are approaching. Geez.

What do you want for nuthin'? A Rubber Biscuit?




Good thing I don't have an affinity for "the holidays".

 

[kathyt]

I definitely like the second one better. I really like the way you have her posed with her hands up by her face, but I also agree that portrait orientation would have done justice to this image. Also, your composition is lacking with the dead center subject. Keep on practicing.

 

[kathyt]

Glamour my ass.

You could be a little bit nicer since the holidays are approaching. Geez.

What do you want for nuthin'? A Rubber Biscuit?




Good thing I don't have an affinity for "the holidays".

That was a wasted 2:49 of my time. I didn't get your point of that song.

 

[sandrat]

Thanks Kathy I appreciate your feedback.

 

[kundalini]

That was a wasted 2:49 of my time. I didn't get your point of that song.

No worries. It's probably for the best.

 

[tirediron]

That was a wasted 2:49 of my time. I didn't get your point of that song.

No worries. It's probably for the best.

Geeezzzz dude... whatsamatter you? Wake up on the wrong side of the litter box today or somthin'?