Britney Spears

[Derrel]

The Brenizer Method Explained With Directions Bui Photography – San Francisco & Bay Area Artistic Wedding Photography

That might have worked...

There's more than one way to achieve shallow DOF with a moderately wide angle of view in a single frame...Mr. Brenizer could be shooting 4x5 sheet film and getting the effects he wants in one, single frame, instead of taking 50 small-format digital captures with a medium telephoto set to f/1.4.

For this lakeside shot, could you maybe have used FP synch, a higher ISO level, and a wide-aperture like f/2.8? The flash is not on the camera, so you could have backed the camera up and used a longer focal length lens and a wide aperture to sublimate the background's focus.

Increasing format size from 24x36 to 6x6 to 6x7 to 6x9 to 4x5, 5x7,or even 8x10 is the fastest, most direct way to get shallow depth of field with equivalent angles of view. Most of the old fantastic album cover art was shot on the apropos 6x6 rollfilm format...perfect proportion (square) and shallow DOF.

 

[Sbuxo]

i love how we never got the Britney Spears explanation.:er:

 

[Sebastian Riel Ph.]

i love how we never got the Britney Spears explanation.:er:

I agree I clicked on this thread only to be betrayed. It's not the first time mind you... lol. Your second image is better, there, I kept it positive....

 

[Village Idiot]

i love how we never got the Britney Spears explanation.:er:

well, since no one ever visits the gallery sections since everyone post in the noob forum, you gotta do something to get some views.

I love how you did. :er:

 

[lunaaa]

i love the mood the photo creates. makes you wanna sit at the same spot she is sitting at

 

[Sbuxo]

i love how everyone is loving things.
and yea, so betrayed but I like the hippie mood to it. [:

 

[AlexL]

1. No Britney Spears
2. Why would I click to see Britney Spears!?!
3. Wow, that Brenizer method sounds very interesting. I think I'm going to try that out sometimes.
4. You need to crop the photo

 

[Sbuxo]

1. No Britney Spears
2. Why would I click to see Britney Spears!?!
3. Wow, that Brenizer method sounds very interesting. I think I'm going to try that out sometimes.
4. You need to crop the photo

I only clicked to see "Britney" hoping it wasn't a paparazzi shot but an actual photoshoot meaning he had connects with celebrities like thaaaat.

 

[dak1b]

i personally think it cud use a little more light...

 

[Browncoat]

In the first photograph, I think your subject gets lost in the woods (pun intended). To me at least, it looks like a posed studio shot with a fake backdrop.

This second pic, however...I really like. It's much more convincing. Here she looks like a true musician, and you just happened to stumble across her playing a tune. This photo has a very earthy feel with the colors and I think it conveys a lot of emotion, which by the looks of her, probably also comes across in her songs.

Oh...and leave the tattoos. They tell a story.

 

[Steve Reddin]

Hi,

On the first image, as previously stated, I'd agree with the framing. Overall it looks like an image where the photographer was cautious about getting too close to the subject, I know you wanted to shoot with the surroundings as part of the photograph, but it's very hard to do this successfully as you are shooting half way between a landscape and a portrait, and more often than not the image ends up halfway between them as well without achieving either. I'd be tempted here to shoot this as square rather than landscape, or just crop it left and right into square format, it already strikes me as a CD cover style shot and I think would work better in this format. On a side note there's a white mark on the guitar, I'm not sure what it is but it should be cloned out, it's fairly prominent, as are the marks on her leg. These erroneous items should be dealt with before the image is shown to anyone, it shows a lack of attention to detail on your part, something that will go strongly against you in a portfolio.

The second image is very good, but also a bit dark for me and too warm; her arm looks artificially tanned. One of the key rules not to break (for me anyway) in portrait work is never to cut at a joint, here the image has been cut at her right knee and the result is awkward. I'd bring the cropping up more and cut at the calf of her left leg.

Steve

 

[Derrel]

Here you go...

The Britney Spears Picture 276

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I agree with most of what was said about the first image. "Most" because I would like to know what the image is for before I say more about the composition. The way I look at it, it could be nice on a vinyl album cover (squared up some, cropping most of the right up to her) but it just wouldn't work on a cd cover.

Now, my main problem with it has nothing to do with composition. My first reaction was: wrong angle for her face shape. My second reaction was that she doesn't look very happy, she's looking away from her music and that is not something to see in a musician's photo. A musician should be involved in their music and should be happy. In my book. And, yes, there are many books out there.

One of the best concerts I attended was one by Peter Frampton when he made it big mainly because it was obvious the guy was enjoying himself. And happiness is contagious. The public does not get the hard work that goes into being a musician. The public thinks that you are lucky to make a living being a musician. And so, you should look happy. In your photo, she doesn't.

Kate Bush is a great example of a musician/artist with a very dark side to her who still shows a happy face when in public which includes album covers, posters, etc.

Also, you say you were surprised by what she decided to wear. You shouldn't have been because there is no reason for you to assume she is going to wear what you think looks good on her. When I shoot people, I always ask them to bring a few different sets of clothes... And if it's an outdoor shoot, I'll provide a way for them to change without getting naked in public.

The second shot is better in some ways but not so good in others. Don't like the tilt any more that you do and I sure don't don't like her eyes being closed.

All that being said, good luck with your photography of musicians. It is not easy.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I forgot one thing. DO NOT Photoshop out the tats. They are part of her no matter what some people think. Wouldn't she feel weird/stupid if someone showed up at a concert and asked how come she didn't have any tats in her last photo?