Grant's Headshots C&C

[DGMPhotography]

I don't normally post simple stuff like this anymore, but figured why not - I could use some critique on my headshot technique.

1.
2.
3.
4.

Thanks!

 

[tirediron]

Not bad, but I REALLY wish he wasn't so square to the camera!

 

[Braineack]

And with a longer lens

 

[DGMPhotography]

Not bad, but I REALLY wish he wasn't so square to the camera!

Would you suggest a different crop?

And with a longer lens

Unfortunately that's not really an option right now. The only longer lens I have is my 70-300, and the optics are simply not as good as my 50mm.

 

[Braineack]

At f8 you wouldn't notice

 

[Designer]

Would you suggest a different crop?

Now that you mention it.

How are these going to be used? Passport photos should be cropped square, but if these shots are for company profile shots, then maybe portrait aspect ratio would be better.

His pupils are quite large.

 

[pixmedic]

they seem a little red to me.
any reason for the square crop instead of portrait?

 

[Black_Square]

This crop does not work.

 

[tirediron]

Now that I'm home and seeing these on my "real" monitor, i think I would suggest a re-shoot. There's nothing you can do, crop-wise about the football shoulders, 'square to the camera' pose. The other issue is the beard; it's impressive; so impressive that it's actually over-powering his face. I would set up a similar lighting style, rotate his body 20-30 off-axis, and have him lower his chin to get his beard pointed more down and less toward the camera. This will bring his eyes into greater prominence and make for a more engaging image.

 

[DGMPhotography]

At f8 you wouldn't notice

Oh... you're worried about the DOF. I like having ears a bit fuzzy. Thanks for your input, though.

Would you suggest a different crop?

Now that you mention it.

How are these going to be used? Passport photos should be cropped square, but if these shots are for company profile shots, then maybe portrait aspect ratio would be better.

His pupils are quite large.

Yes, he's always had large pupils. Kinda freaky when he's looking at you haha.

they seem a little red to me.
any reason for the square crop instead of portrait?

I like landscape cropping headshots. It's nondestructive. You always have the option to crop portrait style later on.

Now that I'm home and seeing these on my "real" monitor, i think I would suggest a re-shoot. There's nothing you can do, crop-wise about the football shoulders, 'square to the camera' pose. The other issue is the beard; it's impressive; so impressive that it's actually over-powering his face. I would set up a similar lighting style, rotate his body 20-30 off-axis, and have him lower his chin to get his beard pointed more down and less toward the camera. This will bring his eyes into greater prominence and make for a more engaging image.

I think a re-shoot is a bit harsh, yeah? I like shooting guys square to the camera. It's more masculine. And for headshots, I like symmetry. I could agree with maybe angling it a bit different though, so the beard isn't as much of a distraction.

 

[tirediron]

...I think a re-shoot is a bit harsh, yeah? I like shooting guys square to the camera. It's more masculine. And for headshots, I like symmetry. I could agree with maybe angling it a bit different though, so the beard isn't as much of a distraction.

At the end of the day, if the client is happy, you're good, but personally, I do think you should reshoot. I've see you put out much, much stronger. work. As for the squared shoulders, it can work, and with a more traditional portrait crop, it might in this case, but as-is, I'm not a fan.

 

[DGMPhotography]

...I think a re-shoot is a bit harsh, yeah? I like shooting guys square to the camera. It's more masculine. And for headshots, I like symmetry. I could agree with maybe angling it a bit different though, so the beard isn't as much of a distraction.

At the end of the day, if the client is happy, you're good, but personally, I do think you should reshoot. I've see you put out much, much stronger. work. As for the squared shoulders, it can work, and with a more traditional portrait crop, it might in this case, but as-is, I'm not a fan.

That's fair. I'd be interested to know what you consider to be much, much stronger (and why).

But yes, the client was very happy with these photos. But as always, I seek to continue improving my craft.

 

[Derrel]

Not enough space above the top of the hair...due to shooting in a landscape orientation on a portrait.

Crop these to squares, or re-shot with the correct camera orientation and adequate spacing above the head, OR enlarge the canvas and clone in additional space above the head, OR crop wayyyyyy in, into the forehead zone.

I am, not really a fan of the flat, low-ratio lighting scheme, but the expression and eye contact you've captured in #4 is VERY ,very strong. A very pleasing expression he conveys to the camera's eye in that last shot. The other three pale in comparison, with non-genuine expressions. In shots one, two, and three, he is showing us his 'picture face' type expressions. But shot #4--winner

 

[DGMPhotography]

Not enough space above the top of the hair...due to shooting in a landscape orientation on a portrait.

Crop these to squares, or re-shot with the correct camera orientation and adequate spacing above the head, OR enlarge the canvas and clone in additional space above the head, OR crop wayyyyyy in, into the forehead zone.

I am, not really a fan of the flat, low-ratio lighting scheme, but the expression and eye contact you've captured in #4 is VERY ,very strong. A very pleasing expression he conveys to the camera's eye in that last shot. The other three pale in comparison, with non-genuine expressions. In shots one, two, and three, he is showing us his 'picture face' type expressions. But shot #4--winner

I can agree with that. And actually, these photos are all composites. I made the background, so extending it is no problem.

 

[Braineack]

Oh... you're worried about the DOF. I like having ears a bit fuzzy. Thanks for your input, though.

the longer the focal length the narrower the DOF...

I took this a f/6.3 with that same 70-300mm at 135mm. My ears are OOF: Selfie 4

I wasn't worried about the DOf, I was worried about the opticalness. As you can see on my old $200 D5100 and that $150 lens, it was still pretty damn sharp.

at 165mm and f/8, again, fuzzy ears: Self Portrait


if we are being perfectly honest, the only thing that actually looks sharp in those shots is his beard, it could be the way you've process, your f-stop, or just the small size you always present images at. My 32" 4K monitor hates you.