First boudoir shoot......

[Lmphotos]

Well, a while back I posted to get some feed back about using an external flash for my boudoir shoot with my friend. Well it was a huge FAIL....The flash was just annoying and I tried and tried to try every setting to make the look I wanted and it just kept getting worse. I would love to hear the brains on here critique (by critique I mean try and help me improve not just bash.)
The executions are horrible I know I chopped many limbs I was so frazzled over how it was going I started really loosing my comp. #1,2 & 4 are done with window light I gave up on the flash. #3 is the only one I even would attempt to Post process with the flash and I still strongly dislike it.

 

[jowensphoto]

The posing is good! These are all very classic boudoir poses, good job on that. The B&W would have looked better with her legs straight up. The way they are tilted kind of makes it look like one leg is growing out of the other.

The focus may be a bit soft in the second, and as you've already noticed you have chopped limbs.

What is it you don't like about the third? I like that one a lot, aside from the chopped foot and it may be a tad oversharpened. Maybe clean up the spots on the floor with a clone brush too. But seriously, I really, really like that one.

The last photo seems a bit cooler than the other two that are processed in-color. You can really see how temp. dictates mood. In the second and third, they seem soft and romantic. The last seems a little more edgy. Neither are wrong or right, but if you did an album you wouldn't place those two next to each other. Know what I mean?

 

[amolitor]

The third one feels a little tightly framed to me. Maybe it's just the chopped off foot, but since I don't (usually) care about that I think it's something else. She just feels too big in the frame, somehow.

I think she should have tucked her foot in closer to herself, you you needed a longer lens. It feels like that foot at the bottom of the frame was going to visually look too big (which might explain why you left it out of the frame?) and it was going to be out of focus as well.

#1 feels a little out of proportion to me as well. I think her legs might be angled away from the camera, making them appear shorter?

The other two are very nice, I got no quibbles with them at all.

 

[Lmphotos]

I'm going to posts some of the flash ones SOOC so you can see....

 

[Lmphotos]

OK here are some SOOC shots. Both are exactly the same place same settings on my camera but two very different looks? I Like the shadows in #1 and the color better but her skin seems dull and dark. #2 her skin seems brighter but the whole thing looks flat to me. The camera was in manual, the flash was in manual... and none of it worked. I played around with my child and hubby and I didnt have near these problems with it the shots turned out great! I was controlling my output with the FEC in camera. Any ideas of what happened or what I can do better?

 

[Derrel]

I am wondering if the flash batteries might have impaired recycling times, causing underexposure in shot #1, and good, full exposure in the second shot? The first shot in Post #5 appears definitely under-exposed. The color is excessively weak, and has that kinda' warm-toned look. The floor is entirely dark, and detail-less but in the second image, the floor's individual floorboards show up clearly.

 

[Lmphotos]

Hmm there were definitely a row of the shots like #4..... Then goes back to how #5 turned out. I really hate the colors in #5 too I'm starting to think its just a combination of beige walls, brown floors and her skin tone versus a flash issue? But honestly the flash was really unreliable in shots. I'm using Energizer Nimh batteries and they were all fully charged before I started. These shots were also at the very beginning of the shoot.

 

[Derrel]

Well...you mentioned using FEC to control the flash. THat makes me think you're using a Canon. Not to try and bash Canon, but the majority of Canon cameras are color-blind in their light- and flash-metering, and on many cameras, not just Canon cameras, flash exposure compensation can be tied very strongly to the exact autofocusing spot that is active and in use when the shot is made. One of the biggest 'issues' Canon has had for a long time is...erratic flash exposure...that's not just "my" opinion...it's been experienced by a lot of people. The same issue tends to occur with the Nikon D80, and to an extent, something similar with the Nikon D7000; With the D80, the exposure system was ACUTELY tuned to the AF focus bracket that was active...it was a big issue. The D7000 has a somewhat similar issue; it tends to sort of "over-process" or "over-dewvelop" its images many times, which can lead to exposures that are a bit too contrasty for many users.

I dunno...flash control in AUTO-modes can be affected by a LOT of factors!!!! One of the basics is this: bounced, or straight ahead flash???? MANY cameras do not perform all that consistently when the flash is bounced...but are exceedingly reliable on straight-ahead, in-the-shoe flash control. When you are using bounce flash, the dynamics of the flash and the room can have a positively HUGE impact...sometimes a bounced flash goes wayyyyyyy up, to say, the second story stairwell...and the amount of light that comes back down is--simply NOT strong enough for a good, generous exposure!!! Sometimes, at smaller f/stops, like f/8 or f/11, at lower ISO values, like 100 to 200, a speedlight just does not have adequate power to give enough light, especially on bounce flash set-ups.

Another little tip: when bouncing the flash, if the flash is left in AUTO-zoom mode, the flash can often be setting itself to a wide-angle focal length,like say 35mm flash coverage...that will spread the beam out very far, and so the beam is wide--and WEAK!!!! Then, when that widely-spread, weak beam bounces, what comes back is...exceedingly weak light. This is one reaosn that many mfrs. suggest that bounce flash be shot with the flash zoom control set to MANUAL, and set to a tele-setting,like 85mm or longer.

Suffice it to say--if you had problems with consistent exposure and bounced flash, there are about six things that "could have" been going wrong...not kidding...See, the thing is, the user can accidentally set a parameter, or two, that will mean the bounce flash is functioning right on the borderline between enough light, and NOT enough light. If the flash-to-wall-to-subject distance is too long for the ISO, the flash zoom, or the f/stop in use, the flash might very well NOT HAVE ENOUGH "oomph!" to make the right exposure. And that is if just one of those three (out of six) factors are wrong or marginal...

 

[Lmphotos]

I am using a canon....wow Derrel thank you for all that info! I am going to be looking at all those things tonight and see of I can't get a better shot!

 

[IByte]

I am using a canon....wow Derrel thank you for all that info! I am going to be looking at all those things tonight and see of I can't get a better shot!

I would also take a look at Christa Meola's "Art of Boudoir Photography". Great book for starters in this field

 

[Lmphotos]

So it was a combination of things....the flash was stuck on 28mm and I thought it was adjusting automatically nope never was! I also popped a coffe filter over the top and boom the lighting was soft and beautiful again I would not thing a little diffusion would make such a difference but it totally did. Thanks for all your answers.

 

[bvengence]

Shes pretty 10/10. Love the light!

 

[ewick]

what were your settings?
also how were you using your flash?
what did you defuse it with?
was it bounced?
for indoor shoots I usually shoot as wide as possible and only a bit of flash. every indoor place is different but try shooting wide open and adjust your shutter accordingly. I usually do about 60th on shutter for indoor. iso 100-200 and f2.8 but thats just how I shoot. your images are not the worst out there. you just have to hone your skills but keep at it.