Angel- Actress Portrait

[DanOstergren]

Today I was hired to take some headshots of an actress. I was feeling inspired and asked if I could take some "experimental" portraits in addition to the headshots I was hired to take. This was the experimental portrait that I liked best.

Shot in natural light. Canon 5D classic, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro lens attached, set to f/5, 1/160th sec, ISO 500.

 

[Derrel]

The reflection of her eyelashes and the top catch lights in both eyes is a really wonderful detail. Speaking of wonderful detail, the detail in the lips and in the chin area is really nice, and I love the way the hair that partially obscures the face is just ever so slightly out of the plane of sharpest focus, but is not objectionably out of focus. This is a really nice portrait, and the lens reveals a lot of fine detail, and I think the 100 mm focal length gives a better facial rendering then the 85 mm does. For many years I liked Nikon's 105 mm/2.5 for this type of facial close-up type of shot. I used to own a copy of that canon 100 mm F2.8 EF macro, and I made one of my favorite portraits of my son with it back into two thousand six, when he was just three years old.

I personally think that the 100 mm-135 mm lens puts you at a better working distance than the 85 mm does,andit tends to make the nose and lips look a little bit smaller than the 85 mm lens does especially on tight close-ups like this. I personally think that if the portrait crops into the forehea, that lenses in the 85 mm range put the photographer too close to the subject, and cause a apparent perspective distortion that is subtly visible in how big the nose is rendered. It is subtle, but I think the 100 mm is actually a better portrait length for the type of tight shot that you show here, in this post.For less close up looks, such as half body or bust shots there is nothing wrong with the 85 mm focal length.

I think that this is a very nice look at her. The hair adds a little bit of mystery and unconventionality. We seldom see a face that is obscured in this way. I think this is a very good picture.

 

[DanOstergren]

The reflection of her eyelashes and the top catch lights in both eyes is a really wonderful detail. Speaking of wonderful detail, the detail in the lips and in the chin area is really nice, and I love the way the hair that partially obscures the face is just ever so slightly out of the plane of sharpest focus, but is not objectionably out of focus. This is a really nice portrait, and the lens reveals a lot of fine detail, and I think the 100 mm focal length gives a better facial rendering then the 85 mm does. For many years I liked Nikon's 105 mm/2.5 for this type of facial close-up type of shot. I used to own a copy of that canon 100 mm F2.8 EF macro, and I made one of my favorite portraits of my son with it back into two thousand six, when he was just three years old.

I personally think that the 100 mm-135 mm lens puts you at a better working distance than the 85 mm does,andit tends to make the nose and lips look a little bit smaller than the 85 mm lens does especially on tight close-ups like this. I personally think that if the portrait crops into the forehea, that lenses in the 85 mm range put the photographer too close to the subject, and cause a apparent perspective distortion that is subtly visible in how big the nose is rendered. It is subtle, but I think the 100 mm is actually a better portrait length for the type of tight shot that you show here, in this post.For less close up looks, such as half body or bust shots there is nothing wrong with the 85 mm focal length.

I think that this is a very nice look at her. The hair adds a little bit of mystery and unconventionality. We seldom see a face that is obscured in this way. I think this is a very good picture.

Thanks Derrel. Something funny that I'd like to point out is how hesitant I was to start working with the 100mm focal length, regardless of having seen firsthand how amazing it is. For a long time I used only the 135mm focal length and got very comfortable with it. Eventually I realized that my 85mm f/1.8 lens essentially did the same job with more versatility than the 135mm focal length had, and so I ended up selling my 135mm f/2L lens and started shooting exclusively with my 85mm f/1.8 lens. Before that I was intern to a photographer for a good while who created stunning portraits using a 100mm lens. I always wanted to use a 100mm lens for myself after seeing his work using one, but even after having a 100mm lens gifted to me I was really hesitant about using it because of how comfortable I had become with my 85mm lens, so my 100mm lens stayed in my camera bag for the last 6 months, except for one family portrait shoot and one personal portrait shoot of a handsome guy that I had a crush on. Otherwise, this lens sat in my camera bag unused, while I dealt with back focusing issues on my 85mm lens that I put up with simply because it was a focal length that I was very comfortable with. It's ironic, because one might think that after using a 135mm lens almost exclusively for so long that I would be much more open to using a lens that's practically square between 85mm and 135mm. This being my third time using the lens, I think I've learned how much I love this focal length; it's a great portrait length that has the benefits of 85mm's versatility with 135mm's compression, and additionally it has macro capabilities that allow me to capture new facial compositions that I absolutely couldn't capture with any other lens of mine. It also doesn't have the back-focusing issues that my 85mm lens has (I realize this is an issue that not all 85mm f/1.8 lenses have, but it's a welcome improvement for me nonetheless). Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is how easy it is to become comfortable with a singular focal length (as someone who prefers prime lenses). It's a good lesson for anyone to learn that it's really not good to let oneself get too used to just one focal length. I also picked up a 50mm f/1.4 lens this year and hope to get more comfortable with that focal length as well.

 

[SquarePeg]

Really nice, love the eyes and messy hair.

 

[Tropicalmemories]

Excellent.

Really like the tight crop, intense look, reflections in her eyes ans messy hair - which is sexy whilst also not covering her pupils, so does not distract.

I've tried longer lenses for my amateur portrait sessions - but feel I'm just too far away to connect with my model - I feel like I need to phone her; 'hello, it's me, look at the lens, bend your arm, that's perfect .... see you later'.

 

[Granddad]

Eyes to die for!!

 

[DanOstergren]

Really nice, love the eyes and messy hair.

Thank you!

 

[DanOstergren]

Excellent.

Really like the tight crop, intense look, reflections in her eyes ans messy hair - which is sexy whilst also not covering her pupils, so does not distract.

I've tried longer lenses for my amateur portrait sessions - but feel I'm just too far away to connect with my model - I feel like I need to phone her; 'hello, it's me, look at the lens, bend your arm, that's perfect .... see you later'.

Thank you!

Out of curiosity, are you using a camera with a cropped sensor or full frame sensor? When I had a cropped sensor camera I would have that same problem if I were using a lens longer than 85mm. On a full frame sensor camera I don't have to be nearly as far away.

 

[DanOstergren]

Eyes to die for!!

Agreed.

 

[Tropicalmemories]

Excellent.

Really like the tight crop, intense look, reflections in her eyes ans messy hair - which is sexy whilst also not covering her pupils, so does not distract.

I've tried longer lenses for my amateur portrait sessions - but feel I'm just too far away to connect with my model - I feel like I need to phone her; 'hello, it's me, look at the lens, bend your arm, that's perfect .... see you later'.

Thank you!

Out of curiosity, are you using a camera with a cropped sensor or full frame sensor? When I had a cropped sensor camera I would have that same problem if I were using a lens longer than 85mm. On a full frame sensor camera I don't have to be nearly as far away.

Yes, cropped - Fuji X-T2. Fine with the 35mm and 60mm lenses, but use longer and it's time to get the semaphore flags out.

 

[Derrel]

Thanks for the insight, Dan. I had the 135/2 L a long time back. And the 85/1.8, anf the 50/1.4 EF...all are nice lenses, each one very different from the other. Thank for the insights into your lens journey.

Excellent.

Really like the tight crop, intense look, reflections in her eyes ans messy hair - which is sexy whilst also not covering her pupils, so does not distract.

I've tried longer lenses for my amateur portrait sessions - but feel I'm just too far away to connect with my model - I feel like I need to phone her; 'hello, it's me, look at the lens, bend your arm, that's perfect .... see you later'.

Thank you!

Out of curiosity, are you using a camera with a cropped sensor or full frame sensor? When I had a cropped sensor camera I would have that same problem if I were using a lens longer than 85mm. On a full frame sensor camera I don't have to be nearly as far away.

Yes, cropped - Fuji X-T2. Fine with the 35mm and 60mm lenses, but use longer and it's time to get the semaphore flags out.

FF, 85mm lens...8.47 foot tall picture height, 20 feet, camera to subject distance

APS-C, 85mm lens...8.47 foot tall picture area 34.5 feet, apprx. depending on Canon 1.6x, or Nikon/Fuji/Pentax 1.5 x

 

[DanOstergren]

Thanks for the insight, Dan. I had the 135/2 L a long time back. And the 85/1.8, anf the 50/1.4 EF...all are nice lenses, each one very different from the other. Thank for the insights into your lens journey.

I'm glad you appreciated it.
In hindsight I realize I could have made what was a very long-winded response much shorter lol. I blame marijuana.