Finally a real photoshoot with the girlfriend and my car :) C&C please

[shortpballer]

So we finally got out today and did some real shooting with my lights. Let me know what you guys think. And what I can do to improve. This pictures were supposed to be more on the glamour side then on the portrait side.

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

 

[camz]

#1: I think the background is distracting and doesn't really do much for the shot. Her feet are cut off as well.

#2: You're getting barrel distortion and it's making her head look bigger then normal. I would've had her lean back more.

#3: This one is my favorite alghouth there's a lens flare across her face and her foot is cut off. This shot reminds me of a up and coming bay area photographer - probably one of the best strobists guys I know off. Check him out Ed Pingol. I would personally just clone out the stands too.

#4: Light stand sticking out her head and also down on the buttom right. You can clone this out easy but pretty good shot.

#5: This is a very sensual pose. This will catch alot of attention if your trying to sell something(very revealing). Try working with her hands a bit more. Try having her turn her hand to the side. Her left hand on this one seems a bit unatural b/c her pinky and pointer are folded. On her right hand I would've personally had her put it down her right knee sideways to the camera.

Pretty good for your first real shoot. Glad to hear that you have a girlfriend that's willing to pose for you while earn those stripes :thumbup:

 

[thenikonguy]

nice car!

 

[Tee_bird]

Your girlfriend is gorgeous, and if that's your car... WOW!

To me, the white balance looks a little cool in them all.

 

[ANDS!]

Gotta work on that composition mate. Also, you want to work on light placement. Just firing the lights off barebulbed is fine and dandy - but its not the best way to incoprate lens flaring into your shots, and as you can see its a quick and easy way to get unwanted hot spots.

Have a gander at some of those DVD's I mentioned in your other thread. This DVD by Joe McNally and Bob Krist is a steal at 30 bucks.

 

[JIP]

Overall they are not bad but you have to put that 17 away for the portraits. If you stick that lens in someones face it is going to distort her features and look weird. I would back off and use that 70-200 you have you can get the same effect with it but with less distortion.

 

[manaheim]

Nice... um... car.

*cough*

 

[shortpballer]

Your girlfriend is gorgeous, and if that's your car... WOW!

To me, the white balance looks a little cool in them all.

Thank you Yes its my car. I actually messed up the front lip on the way to do the photoshoot. I was really upset. Damn San Diego roads....

 

[DScience]

this is funny.


Out of curiosity, if you have the money, obviously, why are you using a 20D?

 

[Derrel]

Well, No. 1 and 2. are almost but no cigar. On 1 you cut off her feet, on 2 her head is foreshortening and looks as big as her entire hips and pelvis area. #3 is a good pose, but you cut off her foot,and I'm not sure how I like the strobes being visible in the shot. I'd have to say no cigar on 3 as well.

#4,with her seated in the car gets a small,domestic cigar; the light stand foot at LRC and her hand cropped off at URC earn you the domestic cigar,not the Cuban.

#5. Probably the best shot. If her hand were to be positioned a little bit better, it'd be almost a pro-quality shot. Her makeup and expression look good,and she is shown large.

On #1 and #2, the background is really distracting from the main subject; if you would have shot those two from farther away,with a longer focal length setting, and using even a tiny bit of on-camera or on-axis flash, it would have made the background focus drop off more, and would have eliminated the foreshortening, which exaggerates the size of her head,and a bit of flash would have added some sparkle to her eyes. I mention the foreshortening because in #4, it WORKS FOR YOU, by making her legs appear longer. Short focal length settings used in-close can cause apparent perspective distortion, and on 1 and 2 it doesn't look good, but on 4 it works okay.

Numbers 4 and 5 have the best lighting. Nice car, even nicer girl.

 

[camz]

this is funny.


Out of curiosity, if you have the money, obviously, why are you using a 20D?

Hey I use a 20D, what's wrong with that?

 

[shortpballer]

this is funny.


Out of curiosity, if you have the money, obviously, why are you using a 20D?

Why not? it does what I need for now. And I am in mad debt to that car. Which surprisingly costs FAR less than all you think. I'm just a smart shopper. I paid 300 for my 20d. You can expect just the same for my car.

 

[Tee_bird]

this is funny.


Out of curiosity, if you have the money, obviously, why are you using a 20D?

Why not? it does what I need for now. And I am in mad debt to that car. Which surprisingly costs FAR less than all you think. I'm just a smart shopper. I paid 300 for my 20d. You can expect just the same for my car.

Kudos to you for that. I know far too many people who blow all their money instantly and don't take the time to shop around.

I am curious where you find such deals. I suck at it. XD

 

[manaheim]

That car is way cheaper than most people expect. Problem is it's NOT something you can drive in inclimate weather... not even CLOSE. So it winds up being EFFECTIVELY a pricey toy, but only because it is only a toy.

 

[fiveoboy01]

Yeah I was looking at used Elises, they are suprisingly affordable. Maybe in a couple years...

I can't add to what anyone else said... BUT, I would ditch the nose ring. JMO.

Your subject is damn good looking(and I ain't talkin about the car).