A few portraits from this weekend

[TreeofLifeStairs]

The last one is shot in front of a mirror right? Doesn't that mess with the camera's metering? Could that have anything to do with your exposure difficulties for that shot? For 4000 ISO that doesn't look bad.

 

[Derrel]

I think #3 deserves more time to spend with editing

Like going back in the past and having her grandma not walk into the shot?


I redid #2, better for you Daryl?

Certainly better

Pulling the original shot, and then subsequently re-posting a reworked version of a shot that originally had issues doesn't do anybody any good as far as learning anything or showing others what the problems or issues were...

Any comments about cropping, or results, or how an image or set looks, whatever are all rendered totally meaningless by pulling shots, then re-posting new,differently worked, differently-cropped, or differently rendered images. Posting, receiving C&C, then pulling and re-posting new versions just makes the effort people who offered up time and effort to give C&C originally, little more than just a big waste of time.

 

[Braineack]

Like going back in the past and having her grandma not walk into the shot?


I redid #2, better for you Daryl?

Certainly better

Pulling the original shot, and then subsequently re-posting a reworked version of a shot that originally had issues doesn't do anybody any good as far as learning anything or showing others what the problems or issues were...

Any comments about cropping, or results, or how an image or set looks, whatever are all rendered totally meaningless by pulling shots, then re-posting new,differently worked, differently-cropped, or differently rendered images. Posting, receiving C&C, then pulling and re-posting new versions just makes the effort people who offered up time and effort to give C&C originally, little more than just a big waste of time.

yeah sorry, I "replaced" it on Flickr without thinking so the image disappeared on the original post so I just updated it there. I can repost the original rendering later today.

 

[Braineack]

The last one is shot in front of a mirror right? Doesn't that mess with the camera's metering? Could that have anything to do with your exposure difficulties for that shot? For 4000 ISO that doesn't look bad.

I was using matrix metering, Aperture Priority using f/3.2-f5.6, min shutter of 1/60, and auto-iso with 800 as the base. I took a good number of non-flash images during the setup in order to try to get a base, where the subjects were pretty underexposed, but the room looked well lit. I found that if I wasn't using auto-iso there were inconsistencies depending on where I was shooting in the room. I might have saved a shot or two of this that I can show as an example, but i may have deleted them already.

I then added flash. I was using my SB-700 so I just put it on TTL mode and didn't worry about it. I considered remote positioning my YN560 in the corner of the room to bounce it off the ceiling to fill the ambient but it's not something I've tried yet and I was happy with just the on-camera bounce flash.

Most shots were taken at 1000-1200 ISO. Depending where the shots were taken, I was either bouncing off a wall/ceiling behind me, or angling the flash about 15° towards the subject. I had an orange gel on it to try to match the lighting of room; I had scoped out the place before I came to shoot so I was aware of the conditions.

I was pretty happy with the outcome and using this method I was able to just focus on taking pictures; there was no chimping or fussing around and there was very little post processing needed on the shots.

My issue really was that the room was so small that it was hard to get anything more than just the posed shots; but this is what she wanted me there for. These were friends and family she hadn't seen in 5-10 years and they just wanted pictures together. I'd prefer a more journalistic approach myself.


but about the mirror...

didn't seem to matter, it's just reflecting the rest of the room that was light evenly. I just made sure that anytime I was shooting up against the mirror that I squatted down low as to not reflect my image. I actually like how my flash halo's around the bride-to-be's head in the shot I posted.


I shot something for their family last year and I really wasn't as happy with the shots, so I'm glad I'm proving and getting more experience dealing with different situations:

you may recognize two of these people here if you're a sports fan.

 

[Vince.1551]

No.3 is great

 

[Braineack]

Pulling the original shot, and then subsequently re-posting a reworked version of a shot that originally had issues doesn't do anybody any good as far as learning anything or showing others what the problems or issues were...

Any comments about cropping, or results, or how an image or set looks, whatever are all rendered totally meaningless by pulling shots, then re-posting new,differently worked, differently-cropped, or differently rendered images. Posting, receiving C&C, then pulling and re-posting new versions just makes the effort people who offered up time and effort to give C&C originally, little more than just a big waste of time.

Here's you go!


Before / After

Stephanie and Max by The Braineack, on Flickr


I had the highlights slider turned up for some reason (might have synced from another edit) and I needed to correct for the orange gel on my flash. I'm still not entirely pleased with it, I like a warmer shot, but I having a hard time getting the tones I want and I dont like the blue shadows. But it's much better than when I started.

 

[Braineack]

bump in case you missed I reposted the original upload.


fwiw, got a potential shoot from posting the first on FB

 

[DGMPhotography]

bump in case you missed I reposted the original upload.


fwiw, got a potential shoot from posting the first on FB

Congrats! And they all wanted to tell me that FB was useless.. psh!

 

[Braineack]

FB is like the best place to advertise for free. Not shaving my head though.

 

[Derrel]

Yeah, now people can see what the orange gel looks like over the flash. (JUst wondering if you've tried a radically too-low WB setting to see how that might look on the oranged-up shot?)

I use FB but don't make it seem like "advertising". It's surprising how much reach a FB photo set has when you photograph people who are "influential" among their circle of friends.

 

[Braineack]

Yeah, now people can see what the orange gel looks like over the flash. (JUst wondering if you've tried a radically too-low WB setting to see how that might look on the oranged-up shot?)

Fooling with the WB didn't help much, just started turning everything green or orange.

I meant to post the settings I did in LR to show what I had to do to correct.

 

[jaomul]

Thing here is also that because you want to improve and get c and c the suggestions and criticism can make it sound like photos are bad. Truth of the matter is that while everything can be improved you got good family shots in a situation where you had to use iso 4000 and bounce flash. Not everyone can do that , and to most who are not photographers- basically the people in the photos and family, very little in the photos can be faulted.

 

[snowbear118 49]

Really nice; thanks for sharing.

Like going back in the past and having her grandma not walk into the shot?

Put some of this up.

 

[Braineack]

Thing here is also that because you want to improve and get c and c the suggestions and criticism can make it sound like photos are bad. Truth of the matter is that while everything can be improved you got good family shots in a situation where you had to use iso 4000 and bounce flash. Not everyone can do that , and to most who are not photographers- basically the people in the photos and family, very little in the photos can be faulted.

I can take the world's harshest critique/criticism; I will only improve with it.

In the span of just a year, how long I've been a member here, the methodology and thought I put behind each picture has improved ten fold and this has lead to significant improvements in the final result. I remember my first shots I posted here I thought were outstanding, and actually got me back into photography and they were torn to shreds, but the comments weren't off base.

That group shot I posted above in #19 was taken in April of 2013. They aren't awful, but I pretty much just slapped on the flash, my 35mm 1.8, arbitrarily set it to 800 ISO and f/4, and called it a day (It appears I even had the camera set to -.67EV as well without knowing it).

I didn't scope out the place first, test my exposure with ambient only, think about where subjects would pose, framing, composition, where to bounce (ceiling, wall, behind, to the side), etc.

And because I had no method, or any experience to that matter, the results showed. The subjects are unexposed, the ambient makes the room look very dim and dark, there's no warmth to the pictures, the framing is bad, there's a lot of crooked horizons, there's distracting elements in almost all the shots, there's nothing creative/unique to them.

Honestly, someone with a PNS camera that night could have come in and matched my pictures.

I try to learn with every picture posted here, not just my own. And I hope others learn from me as well, this is why I tend to go out of my way and post how I took the shot and these long winded replies

 

[pixmedic]

whats up with the women's hands in the group shot? Is that the "scissoring" thing i have heard women talk about? My wife mentioned doing that once, but shes always rambling on about quilting stuff so i didn't pay much attention to it. Are they a group of sewing enthusiasts?


i like the first to shots. not digging the head in the foreground of the third.
lighting looks good on the group shot, albeit maybe a hair on the warm side. (a do tend to like things a little on the cool side so...could just be me)