a strange studio shoot

CA_ · Dec 20, 2012

In an effort to avoid all of the generic stock-photo looking pictures that seem to get so much praise on this site, I did a bit wilder edit on a picture my girlfriend liked (I wasn't crazy about it due to her hand being out of shot) but you get the idea. I'm debating on whether to leave the sheet material in the background, but I think it gives her some context and depth.

rexbobcat · Dec 20, 2012

Well, um, heh, I like the lighting on her legs. It's very even and really makes the pantyhose pop against the background.

The background seems to be the opposite though on my screen (which is my phone).

There's a blue patch in the left corner fading to white in the middle and then getting darker and more textured as the eye moves image right. The changes are subtle but still noticeable enough, at least to me.

Other than that though, I honestly, and this is just my opinion, don't really see what makes this photo stand out for the generic ones you speak of. I mean...with her hand cut out it looks almost like she's using her hands to hold herself up off the ground and it gives me the feeling of being uncomfortable. Just my honest opinion though. I'm not really a big studio photographer so take it how you will lol.

The_Traveler · Dec 20, 2012

This almost seems like two shots, her legs being lit one way and her back and face being overlit another way.
There doesn't seem to be any reason for the almost blown out areas on her cheek, forehead and right shoulder.

e.rose · Dec 20, 2012

rexbobcat said:
Well, um, heh, I like the lighting on her legs. It's very even and really makes the pantyhose pop against the background.

The background seems to be the opposite though on my screen (which is my phone).

There's a blue patch in the left corner fading to white in the middle and then getting darker and more textured as the eye moves image right. The changes are subtle but still noticeable enough, at least to me.

Other than that though, I honestly, and this is just my opinion, don't really see what makes this photo stand out for the generic ones you speak of. I mean...with her hand cut out it looks almost like she's using her hands to hold herself up off the ground and it gives me the feeling of being uncomfortable. Just my honest opinion though. I'm not really a big studio photographer so take it how you will lol.

The_Traveler said:
This almost seems like two shots, her legs being lit one way and her back and face being overlit another way.
There doesn't seem to be any reason for the almost blown out areas on her cheek, forehead and right shoulder.

I'm sorry, but I have to agree with both of these guys. And the backdrop is distracting by her feet, and the "wild" processing you did, isn't really all that wild. If anything it makes her look too red. The whites of her eyes are red...

If you didn't feel strongly about this shot due to the hand being cut off (which is a major reason why this shot doesn't work for me), then why post it? Why not post something else from the shoot that you *do* like and feel strongly about? :sillysmi:

amolitor · Dec 20, 2012

There is much to like about this. I think the cut off hand is ok, for this reason: She looks uncomfortable, the shot is uncomfortable, the whole thing is kind of vibrating with a bit of tension. Cutting the hand off makes us feel close in to the tension, and breaks some expectations and increases that tension. It's the dissonance that the rest of the image is leading up to, with its combination of comfortable fashion tropes and light, and the unease of the model.

The eyes are very disturbing, and in light of what I just said I am not sure whether I like them or not.

She's looking wayy off to the side, the irises are cranked fully into corners, which is stressful. More importantly, the whites have a pretty good red cast to them.

rexbobcat · Dec 20, 2012

amolitor said:
There is much to like about this. I think the cut off hand is ok, for this reason: She looks uncomfortable, the shot is uncomfortable, the whole thing is kind of vibrating with a bit of tension. Cutting the hand off makes us feel close in to the tension, and breaks some expectations and increases that tension. It's the dissonance that the rest of the image is leading up to, with its combination of comfortable fashion tropes and light, and the unease of the model.

The eyes are very disturbing, and in light of what I just said I am not sure whether I like them or not.

She's looking wayy off to the side, the irises are cranked fully into corners, which is stressful. More importantly, the whites have a pretty good red cast to them.

I hate to be "that guy" but where is the line between technically unsound and artistically tensioned?

If this is a parody of its genre then I guess it works but if not then...Yeah...

I think if there was more context given then maybe t would be easier to form an "accurate" opinion, but with the info given it just says to me awkward girl with awkward lighting in front of an awkward background. I guess to help rectify that though the photographer could say "I meant to do that". Lol

Your comments are falling into the postmodernist realm haha.

amolitor · Dec 20, 2012

Heh

There's definitely a spectrum from: Hits all the standard tropes dead on ---> Hits none of them and is a mess

I agree that this one is kind of close to the 'is just a mess' line, but for me it seems to hit enough of the traditional elements to hang together, with the mistakes/choices/oddities dense enough to make it interesting but not so much as to wreck it. Your mileage may vary!

nycphotography · Dec 20, 2012

This one just doesn't do much for me.

The lighting is off. over exposed on her, the falloff has the shoes different colors.

The pose/composition makes an awkward use of the space not letting the eye follow a normal path.... yet breaking the normal flow doesn't serve any alternate purpose either.

I think you should post your favorite from the session for comparison.

nycphotography · Dec 20, 2012

If I walked onto your set and you asked for my opinion...

First, I'd bring the light more forward... say 7 oclock vs 8 oclock. that will reduce fall off across the frame and reduce shadows while leaving enough for definition.

Second, in this pose... I'd open the shoulders more to the camera. And move both hands... the back one is even worse than the front one to me.

I might reverse her position... or if she's set and it's easier to move the light, try the light at 5 oclock.

Finally, I'd have her raise the shoulders and arch the back sligtly... it gets the same effect as sucking in the stomach only much more naturally.

Each of these things may work, or my not... it's a process. But that's what I might try.

If this was my g/f and my session... I'd go reshoot it right away trying suggestions to see what works and doesn't work.

Also, and try not to take this the wrong way... but she has the "g/f as my model expression". What do I mean? Well... she looks a little shy, a little bored, and a little like she's just doing this to humor you. You have to get her (or any model) to commit to what she's doing. Next time, once you get everything set... get her to "do something". Tell her a joke. Get her to do a marilyn smile. Tell her to pretend some scene. tell her to squirm like she knows a secret. whatever shoot you're doing... you should have a theme, a scenario, that the model can get into and go with.

Hope this helps.

Derrel · Dec 20, 2012

amolitor said:
Heh

There's definitely a spectrum from: Hits all the standard tropes dead on ---> Hits none of them and is a mess

I agree that this one is kind of close to the 'is just a mess' line, but for me it seems to hit enough of the traditional elements to hang together, with the mistakes/choices/oddities dense enough to make it interesting but not so much as to wreck it. Your mileage may vary!

You three guys (rexbobcat, amolitor, and nycphotography) all offer interesting C&C...