Glamour Shots

Restomage · Jul 22, 2009

For this shoot my main objective was to practice some new lighting techniques. I had a small hand-held softbox with a SB-600 and a gold reflector. For some of the shots I used a 32" diffuser to diffuse the sun. I didn't want to get too crazy with the posing, so I just stuck to some simple poses.

The main problems I had that I need to correct is first I should have used a silver or white reflector instead of the gold in some of the shots, the sun was still too bright to pull off the gold, a lesson learned. Also another issue that I'm still not 100% sure how to correct is the black shirt and hat. They came out a little underexposed so next time I'm thinking I'll need a more powerful or larger flash coverage, but I'll leave that up to you guys to give me some thoughts on. Oh and I need to remember not to leave the camera on 640ISO lol. Anyway, please C&C!

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Full Gallery can be found here: Ashley and Jimmy pictures by Seansrandompics - Photobucket

Restomage · Jul 23, 2009

No tips or comments?

bitteraspects · Jul 23, 2009

definitely looks like you needed more light. maybe ditch the softbox

William Petruzzo · Jul 23, 2009

These are pretty good. Good job making use of limited equipment, too!

You're right about the gold reflector. But I think I disagree that the shirt is underexposed. While technically it may be, photographs are made up of dark and light spaces. Successful photography doesn't necessarily have to have every possible detail visible at all times. In fact, before the digital age, we'd have just accepted that some details will be lost for the sake of pleasing contrast.

In the 1st and 5th image, the contrast on the hat is only a problem because the actual shape is confused. But that could be remedied by carefully skimming some light across the bill of the cap. Or posing in such a way that makes the hat's shape clear.

But I think besides that, the contrast is more valuable than the details in the fabric.

I'm not a big fan of the light coming from below eye level. Especially in photographs of women. When I'm using a reflector (especially), I always try to bounce the light from at least eye level or higher. It tends to be more flattering to the subject.

For the most part, I like the images taken using the softbox. I would suggest that you increase the power on the flash a bit and adjust your settings accordingly to pull your subjects out of the background a bit more.

I think these trials were pretty successful.

JayClark79 · Jul 24, 2009

Could they be alittle on the dark side because most of the shots were taken in the shade?

c.cloudwalker · Jul 24, 2009

bpetruzzo said:
Successful photography doesn't necessarily have to have every possible detail visible at all times. In fact, before the digital age, we'd have just accepted that some details will be lost for the sake of pleasing contrast.

Although I agree with the first sentence, I do not with the second one. And Ansel Adams would probably hit you over the head with his view camera.

But what surprised me most about your statement is that, from what I understand about digital so far, its tonal range is more limited than that of film... I am brand new to digital so I may have understood wrong.

As for the photos, a bit more detail in the shirt and cap would be a big improvement. I personally find the lack of detail in the cap more annoying than in the shirt. There seems to be plenty enough difference between the ambient and flash light that you could have turned up the flash power and get more details in those two areas. This may be a case of not needing the soft box.

For practice shots, they're not bad a all. And the more you practice, the better you'll get.

gopal · Jul 24, 2009

i am worried about her facial and body tone....in some it is not matching....and as title suggests....there is no glamour except the beautiful laughter.

Baaaark · Jul 25, 2009

This has nothing to do with how good or bad your photos are, but I don't like how red her cheeks are. I don't think you can fix that, though, cause that's just who she is.

Other than that, she's a beautiful girl. ;-)

musicaleCA · Jul 25, 2009

Baaaark said:
This has nothing to do with how good or bad your photos are, but I don't like how red her cheeks are. I don't think you can fix that, though, cause that's just who she is.

Other than that, she's a beautiful girl. ;-)

Sure you can! Just desaturate the reds in a hue/saturation adjustment layer. Mask it on the skin. Works like a charm...most of the time. (Wonky colour casts make it harder.)