Cowgirl

[Scuba]

So these are my first "studio" shots ever. They were taken at the Cincinnati PhotoPro Expo this year. I was shooting around about 30 other people so it was a bit of a challenge and was not able to change the lighting or poses. Please give me honest feedback! If they suck they suck don't make me think they are good. Since these are my first portrait shots, I am very interested in my post processing. Even though I did not have the ability to pose or position the model I would still like to hear what could have made them better or what hurts them. Thank you in advance.

All taken with Canon 5D and Canon 70-200 f/4 IS and edited in LR4 and CS6 for cloning.

#1
106mm | 1/100 | f/4 | ISO 640


#2
70mm | 1/100 | f/4 | ISO 640


#3
200mm | 1/125 | f/4 | ISO 640

 

[Austin Greene]

My problem here is I don't know what to attribute to your skills as a shooter, or the skills of whoever set up the shots. How much control did you have exactly? Is all you contributed having pointed the camera, adjusted your settings, and clicked the shutter? If thats the case, you nailed the focus it would seem, but I can't critique much else shooting wise. I have to admit that I'm biased though, these programs came to SF recently and it just seemed like "pros" doing most all of the work and then blowing smoke up peoples rear ends in exchange for a couple hundred bucks. Not saying thats the same here, but its just what I observed and what made me decide to not attend our local one.

As far as post processing goes, I don't really have much to say. Maybe bring the clarity slider down a notch?

 

[Scuba]

I didn't really have any control other then my positioning and camera settings. There were like 20-30 people shooting at the same time, so real ability to do much else. The way this worked it was a booth by Wescott and they provided the model and the lights and props and anyone there could walk up and shoot. This was set up with all the other vendors. So there was no one directing, positioning, or changing the lighting. The lighting was 2 constant lights, not sure exactly which ones.

 

[Luke345678]

I like these shots.

They look great, the model really helps that.

 

[jwbryson1]

Schwing!

 

[Fotofashion.no]

werry nice, really like the close up

 

[Rick50]

I like all three.

 

[Austin Greene]

I didn't really have any control other then my positioning and camera settings. There were like 20-30 people shooting at the same time, so real ability to do much else. The way this worked it was a booth by Wescott and they provided the model and the lights and props and anyone there could walk up and shoot. This was set up with all the other vendors. So there was no one directing, positioning, or changing the lighting. The lighting was 2 constant lights, not sure exactly which ones.

Gotcha. Well in that case I think its safe to say you did really well with what you had to work with.

 

[Scuba]

I like these shots.

They look great, the model really helps that.

Schwing!

werry nice, really like the close up

I like all three.

I didn't really have any control other then my positioning and camera settings. There were like 20-30 people shooting at the same time, so real ability to do much else. The way this worked it was a booth by Wescott and they provided the model and the lights and props and anyone there could walk up and shoot. This was set up with all the other vendors. So there was no one directing, positioning, or changing the lighting. The lighting was 2 constant lights, not sure exactly which ones.

Gotcha. Well in that case I think its safe to say you did really well with what you had to work with.

Thank you.

As far as post processing goes, I don't really have much to say. Maybe bring the clarity slider down a notch?

I just checked and all 3 images the clarity slider is only at +3. Not arguing with you, but what do you see that says to bring it down? Just trying to refine my editing of people.

 

[Austin Greene]

As far as post processing goes, I don't really have much to say. Maybe bring the clarity slider down a notch?

I just checked and all 3 images the clarity slider is only at +3. Not arguing with you, but what do you see that says to bring it down? Just trying to refine my editing of people.

I was grasping at straws a bit there. To me, something still looks the tiniest bit off, something I would normally attribute to a clarity slider. Maybe its the eyes in #2 being almost too sharp (did you dodge/burn them?) or perhaps its just the DOF. Not saying one is right and one is wrong, but I'm just quite used to seeing softer skin, in contrast to the almost grungy look her skin has in #3.

 

[Scuba]

I did use the iris enhance on the eyes and did absolutely no skin softening. I did consider skin softening though. I just checked I didn't go crazy with the sharpening slider either. I did noise reduction and sharpening 46 on luminance reduction and 77 on sharpening. ISO 640 puts decent noise into an image on my old 5D.