C&C for my first three photoshoots - Skye

[ElNico]

I'm splitting these into three threads so as not to dump too many images in one place; and because I suspect each shoot has its own unique merits and issues, so it makes sense to have a separate discussion thread for each. If I shouldn't be doing that let me know.

This is my second shoot from a couple of weeks ago. I think this is my favourite of these first three shoots. The model definitely seems to be the most autonomous of the three - she would sometimes change poses faster than I could take the pictures - and I think she was the best at engaging with the camera without my having to describe a certain facial expression.

More photos from the shoot can be seen in the album on Flickr.

Critique very much appreciated!


DSC01330 - cropped by El Nico, on Flickr


DSC01399 by El Nico, on Flickr


DSC01545 - cropped 2 by El Nico, on Flickr


DSC01583 by El Nico, on Flickr


DSC01610 - cropped by El Nico, on Flickr

 

[tirediron]

Pretty much all under-exposed, from mildly to significantly. Your choice of locations is really doing the model a dis-service; you have found some attractive young ladies, but WHAT does photographing them with random signs and garbage cans in the background really do to improve the images?

My recommendation is that you spend some time working on lighting first off; learn how to light someone with basic two and three light set-ups. The beauty of this is that you don't need a live model. A big doll, worn-out department store dummy, wig "head" or similar is more than sufficient for practice. Once you have the basics of lighting, spend some time learning to "see" the image before you shoot; develop your eye so that you can see the background, notice those garbage cans ahead of time and adjust accordingly; be aware of settings which will give you dappled light, excessive highlights or shadows in critical parts of the image, etc.

Once you've got that sorted, THEN bring in the live talent. Learn basic posing and composition; weight on the back leg, the 'S' curve, masculine & feminine poses, learn about triangles and learn to notice all those little details; exposed bra straps, rings that aren't on straight; necklaces that don't align with the cleavage... it will take a little while (and a LOT of practice), but you will get there!

 

[Fujidave]

What has been said in your other posts, light is important and a good background plus a lot of practice too. The main thing too is, far too many to actually crit.

 

[smoke665]

Everything that John said above!!! Plus I scanned through your Flickr page, as a whole your model poses seem "awkward" and "tense", as if they are forcing a look. Learning the technical aspects in my opinion is easier then learning to work with the model, direct them and remember all the little things. I still find that aspect uncomfortable, and difficult to deal with. Are these paid models or volunteers. Also knowing the purpose of these "shoots" as you call them might be beneficial. Are they merely practice??? If so then it might be advisable to cut down the number of poses, and simply work with one pose to get it right.

 

[ElNico]

Trimmed it down to two photos for the first dress that I feel are very different from eachother and I like them for different reasons, and one for each of the other outfits. If that's still to many, feel free to just pick one; if you want to go into deep detail, no one person need feel obligated to analyze every image.

Your choice of locations is really doing the model a dis-service; you have found some attractive young ladies, but WHAT does photographing them with random signs and garbage cans in the background really do to improve the images?

Finding places to do photoshoots for free is a work in progress. In this case, I didn't know the area, and SHE actually picked both of the locations.

My recommendation is that you spend some time working on lighting first off; learn how to light someone with basic two and three light set-ups. The beauty of this is that you don't need a live model. A big doll, worn-out department store dummy, wig "head" or similar is more than sufficient for practice.

At this time, for a number of different reasons, I am devoid of lighting equipment. (And in retrospect I probably should have clarified that at the start, for context.)
I agree that getting an image where the model isn't either underlit, covered in stripes and shadows from harsh sunlight, or made oversaturated and fake-looking from the flash, is proving very difficult; is there any way of addressing this problem without spending a giant chunk of money?

Learn basic posing and composition; weight on the back leg, the 'S' curve, masculine & feminine poses, learn about triangles and learn to notice all those little details; exposed bra straps, rings that aren't on straight; necklaces that don't align with the cleavage... it will take a little while (and a LOT of practice), but you will get there!

By triangles, do you mean the exposure triangle, or some kind of framing thing? If you mean the exposure triangle, I know about that.
To everything else you mentioned - is that general advise, or are you actually saying you think I haven't learned any of those things? Weight on the back leg, S curve, and masculine/feminine poses are all near the top of the list of things I've leaned and spent a lot of time thinking about when planning and directing poses. I was under the impression that all of those elements were present in these shoots, and in this one especially.
Moreover, I'm honestly very confused about how I'm to get better at those things without getting out there and doing.

I scanned through your Flickr page, as a whole your model poses seem "awkward" and "tense", as if they are forcing a look.

I would say that about the other two shoots (the third one is my fault, the first one more unfortunate as she wasn't feeling well), but not this one. I actually think Skye threw some great facial expressions, and hit some sweet dynamic poses beyond what I specifically told her to do; do you disagree?

Learning the technical aspects in my opinion is easier then learning to work with the model, direct them and remember all the little things. I still find that aspect uncomfortable, and difficult to deal with.

Again, the best way to deal with this is by doing, no?

Are these paid models or volunteers.

The first model (Migena) was a volunteer; the other two are paid.

Also knowing the purpose of these "shoots" as you call them might be beneficial. Are they merely practice???

I'm a hobbyist. I want to do this for fun. I don't plan on eventually making money off of my photography (that would obviously be nice, but it's not my motivation), let alone make it a career. Theoretically, for pretty much every shoot I do, the two main "purposes" are to improve my skills, and to have fun; not necessarily in the same order, but neither motivation is ever absent.

With that in mind, I'm interpreting this question as whether I'm aiming to produce a certain number of images under certain parameters, or if I can just do whatever. If so, the answer to that depends on where you draw the line. On one hand, I'm certainly under no obligation to do or not do certain things; I'm my own boss. But at the same time, while I may not have to get a certain number of different poses, or check off a sufficient quantity of shots I'd envisioned, I still want to; especially when I'm paying for the shoot.

In the third shoot, in retrospect, I definitely tried to cram too much into one session, resulting in reduced quality for each outfit and each pose. But at the other end of the spectrum, if I spend 30 minutes or an hour fine-tuning one pose, that's not worth $70 per hour to me no matter how good that one pose turns out.

If so then it might be advisable to cut down the number of poses, and simply work with one pose to get it right.

Okay, about that. Other than what I just said above about it being worth the money (which, to be clear, only applies if I'm doing what you said to what I would consider an extreme extent)... time for some context about where I'm coming from here.

When I first started planning self-directed shoots, my plan was very much to make detailed notes about each pose I planned to use, and that I would then use these notes to make the pose a reality the way I envisioned it, and to make it work. During my first shoot, and the beginning of my second shoot (this one), I did not use my notes to fine-tune the poses nearly as much as I had imagined I would; due to, basically, nerves, which is neither here not there. However, early in this shoot, the model told me that she thought I was relying my notes and my reference images too much, and that I should "go with the model's flow" more and give her more freedom to do her own thing. And she phrased this not as a complaint, but as advice; she suggested that this was the approach that would lead to me getting better results. I then carried this mindset into the third shoot.

Between the results of my third shoot, a conversation I had with the third model afterwards on the general subject, and what you said here, I'm beginning to think that this feedback may have been ill-advised.

Now, to each their own. Every model has their own way of doing things, and their own allotment of ability to follow direction and ability to provide great poses all on their own. Skye, for her part, was certainly both willing and able to keep on switching it up (I mentioned above that she would sometimes change poses faster than I could take pictures of them), seems to prefer going with the flow to nitpicking over a small handful of poses without moving on, and appeared to feel that doing otherwise was throwing off her groove. But, I'm beginning to suspect that my "default" approach in fact ought to be the opposite of what she said.

Agree/disagree?

 

[smoke665]

Modeling is an art form just like photography. The ability to portray a genuine expression on cue is partly learned and partly comes from within. My favorite model is my 3 year old granddaughter. She has the natural ability to portray a wide range of expression on cue and no preconceived notions as to what that should look like. As we age we develop these ideas of what a certain look should be. That said it is the photographer's job to cue the model with feedback and suggestion, because the model is not seeing what they are presenting. Their "idea" may be way off.

You mentioned lack of lighting. There are some fabulous natural light photographer's on here who use reflectors almost exclusively. A white foam core poster board placed strategically can move tremendous amounts of light. A white building wall same thing, even a newspaper. The reverse of that is blocking light, a black foam core board blocks light, sheer curtain between the model and bright sun diffuses, a building or heavy foliage provides shade (diffused light). Throughout it seems as if you need more research on the subject of lightning.

 

[tirediron]

Just because she picked it, doesn't mean it's a good location. Your job as the photographer is make the talent look good. Period. Part of that is ensuring that the background is suitable. Don't hesitate to tell them why a particular shot won't/can't work or isn't a good idea.

You don't need to spend a BIG chunk of money on lighting. $100 will get you an inexpensive MiC speedlight, umbrella, stand and optical slave. This will get your key light OFF the camera and somewhere it will produce a flattering light. As Smoke mentioned, reflectors can work, especially BIG ones; but you will need to find an assistant.

Sorry, compositional triangles. Creating triangles out of the compositional elements of the image.

In both of the standing images, the weight in clearly on the near leg. There really is no substitute for practice. Spend time learning (YouTube is great) and practicing!

As far as how many and what type of shots, that should really be discussion between you and the talent. When I do TFP type shoots, I generally book them for 90 minutes with 40 for what I want, and 40 for what the model wants (with a break in the middle). That way we both get something that we have envisioned. If you only do what you want, the model isn't getting a lot out of it, and doesn't have a lot of incentive. I generally tell them that in 90 minutes they can expect 6-8 poses and 2-3 proofs per pose.

 

[ElNico]

There are some fabulous natural light photographer's on here who use reflectors almost exclusively. A white foam core poster board placed strategically can move tremendous amounts of light.

You don't need to spend a BIG chunk of money on lighting. $100 will get you an inexpensive MiC speedlight, umbrella, stand and optical slave. This will get your key light OFF the camera and somewhere it will produce a flattering light.

Thank you very much, I was beginning to worry that this issue was going to spell a dead end for me.

a building or heavy foliage provides shade

The first few photos in the black dress, including the closeup that is still posted above (you can see the rest in the Flickr album), are in the shade of a building in otherwise-strong sunlight; tirediron nevertheless says that this photo is significantly underlit (do you disagree?). How to use shade effectively, then, if not like this?

As for heavy foliage, how to do that without, as tirediron said in another thread, "making the model look like she needs another week to ripen?"

As Smoke mentioned, reflectors can work, especially BIG ones; but you will need to find an assistant.

I really don't think I'm able to find someone at the time who I'm comfortable asking to come with me and hold stuff for 1-4 hours; again, I'm a hobbyist, and that sounds like an awful lot of trouble to ask someone to go to just to indulge my hobby.
Can reflectors and diffusers sit on stands? Not ideal I know, but is it possible?

Sorry, compositional triangles. Creating triangles out of the compositional elements of the image.

In terms of making triangles out of things like the model's arm or leg, that's something I already try to do. In terms of effects like this, while cool, that sounds like an extra touch that can be done without (thinking in terms of not juggling unnecessary balls of complexity at this time). If nothing else, I don't see why I need to have enough elements in the image to make a triangle with; as opposed to just the model and a background. Am I wrong?

In both of the standing images, the weight in clearly on the near leg. There really is no substitute for practice. Spend time learning (YouTube is great) and practicing!

For the one hanging off the fence, you may be right. For the one leaning against the railing in the pink dress, it seems to me that having the weight on the front leg is the way to go. If her weight were on her back leg, it seems like that would make the curve of her back, butt and legs less of a right angle and more of an obtuse angle; wouldn't that be a step backwards? Or am I missing something?

When I do TFP type shoots, I generally book them for 90 minutes with 40 for what I want, and 40 for what the model wants (with a break in the middle). That way we both get something that we have envisioned. If you only do what you want, the model isn't getting a lot out of it, and doesn't have a lot of incentive.

That's another concern I had with "working with one pose to get it right" that I forgot to ask about. Splitting it in two is a helpful answer, thanks.

 

[chuasam]

I can shoot in a free location with no lighting gear...
Pick the time of day....and work in open shade

Learn the angles and cropping
The framing feels really awkward.
Not wide enough to be environmental.
Not tight enough to provide connection.

 

[smoke665]

nevertheless says that this photo is significantly underlit (do you disagree?). How to use shade effectively, then, if not like this?

Yes. See comment on your other post. You need to LEARN THE BASICS, and you'll be able to answer your own question.

As for heavy foliage, how to do that without, as tirediron said in another thread, "making the model look like she needs another week to ripen?"

It's called White Balance. See above comment and again you'll know the answer. Your shotgun approach doesn't work. The basics aren't hard to learn but you can't just skip over them and hope you hit something out of luck.

 

[ElNico]

Learn the angles and cropping
The framing feels really awkward.
Not wide enough to be environmental.
Not tight enough to provide connection.

I think this is a false dichotomy. I don't think that a photo needs to either be cropped wide enough to show a model standing in a field, or cropped closer than a full body profile; in fact, the more I think about that, the more ridiculous it sounds.

More specifically, to break it down by image:

-I'd say the connection in the third image is just okay. But, while the connection may not be the best part about it, I really don't see how this pose with this amount of cropping (cropped just close enough to show a full body profile) is fundamentally invalid. I've seen this kind of shot plenty of times in professional photography.

-I personally like the connection in the first image, but I guess it's nothing spectacular; it's good but not great. As for the cropping, I guess it could benefit from being cropped more. I didn't crop that one at all since the framing looked fine, but on analysis now it would probably be even better if it were cropped to mid-torso, or at least as far as possible without cutting off the arms.

-I like the connection in the second image a lot, as well as the general expression; and I really think that the entire pose helps to sell that connection. It doesn't seem like the connection would be improved by cropping in more; I'd say the opposite.

-For the fourth and fifth images, whatever else can be said about the technical execution, I think the "connection" looks awesome. If you think that these two photos "fail to provide connection," I'm honestly scratching my head wondering if we're looking at the same pictures. And, as with the second image, I think that the entire pose helps to sell that connection, and the image would in fact be harmed by cropping closer than a full body profile.

I'll re-crop the first image and replace it in the first post; can I get some feedback on whether that helps, and on the points I raised about the other images? Do others agree/disagree with what I said? Does anyone else agree with what chuasam said? Thanks!


Also, I'd appreciate some other opinions on this:

In both of the standing images, the weight in clearly on the near leg. There really is no substitute for practice. Spend time learning (YouTube is great) and practicing!

For the one hanging off the fence, you may be right. For the one leaning against the railing in the pink dress, it seems to me that having the weight on the front leg is the way to go. If her weight were on her back leg, it seems like that would make the curve of her back, butt and legs less of a right angle and more of an obtuse angle; wouldn't that be a step backwards? Or am I missing something?

 

[Donde]

I´m confused. Some have suggested there are different subjects in the above five photos but they all look like the same woman to me.

 

[ElNico]

I´m confused. Some have suggested there are different subjects in the above five photos but they all look like the same woman to me.

There have been references in this thread to the other two threads I created at the same time, about shoots with different models; Migena and Sadie. That for example is what I meant when I said that Migena was a volunteer and the other two were paid.