Last Night's Shoot - C&C

[etnad0]

Thanks to everyone that gave me C&C last night. This is from the same shoot.

Lens: 50mm
F/1.8
ISO: 100
Shutter 1/30
Auto White Balance
Manual Exposure

Please keep in mind that I'm by no means a retoucher. At the moment I'm really trying to nail lighting and framing. Figured I'd accomplish one thing at a time. I noticed the hot spots on the right side of the photo and the shadow, but unfortunately not until pp. Any other C&C is appreciated.

Original


Jenna70 by etnad0

Edit 1


Jenna7c by etnad0

 

[etnad0]

bump

 

[RebeccaAPhotography]

Your lighting is still off. Your shutter speed is pretty low. Looks like there is some camera shake there or it is oof.

Keeping trying practice makes perfect or a heck of a lot better lol

 

[DiskoJoe]

i cant really help with lighting but the framing could be better. Not really her best angle.

 

[gsgary]

Why did you use F1.8, i would have been at about F8/F11 and why did you use Auto W/B, lighting not great and pose awful also she is way too close to the backdrop

 

[mwcfarms]

Ok when thinking about posing you don't want her arm to be the first thing drawn too in the image. The closest point to the camera is her arm. Tonnes of white skin being the brightest point in the image draws away from her face.

 

[SCraig]

Tons of wrinkles in the background (which moving her a few feet away would have helped with). I don't like her pose with the arm in front either; it makes her arm look far bigger than it most likely is. Also the hair hanging on her forehead really looks messy. Maybe that's what she wanted or something, but it isn't very attractive.

Edit .. Just noticed that you were using the background as a green screen so scratch that gripe as meaningless

 

[tom_anderson18]

My two cents is that, it could have been a decent image maybe if you move her so her arm isn't directly towards the camera maybe a couple of degrees out, as for the lighting and everything else, your shutter speed needs to be higher the aperture you chose I have no idea why .. I would have used as high as possible.

 

[SCraig]

My two cents is that, it could have been a decent image maybe if you move her so her arm isn't directly towards the camera maybe a couple of degrees out, as for the lighting and everything else, your shutter speed needs to be higher the aperture you chose I have no idea why .. I would have used as high as possible.

He was already down to 1/30 second, apparently shooting with just natural or ambient light.

 

[tom_anderson18]

I know he was using 1/30 and its either out of focus or he has camera shake due to that shutter speed, Maybe 1/60 or something a bit faster.

 

[SCraig]

I know he was using 1/30 and its either out of focus or he has camera shake due to that shutter speed, Maybe 1/60 or something a bit faster.

To go to 1/60 he would have had to use ISO 200 since he was already at minimum aperture. Even at 1/30 it's borderline underexposed. Without any additional lighting ISO 200 could have introduced some noise. Personally I would have used some more light and THEN gone to 1/60 as well as a tighter aperture.

 

[Derrel]

The horizontal crop just kills the shot. There's a passable "tall" in there though...crop in very drastically, and eliminate the right hand side of her closest arm, and crop the entire left side off, very close to her back elbow.

 

[MLeeK]

It's really underexposed and you haven't really fixed that problem in the post processing of it.
Why on Earth would you not raise your ISO on this? You could have gotten good exposure easily AND gotten it without having to use such a ridiculously low shutter speed which would have resulted in much better focus.

I'd actually like you to tell us how you decided upon those settings and your reasoning. I think maybe there is something there we can help you with.

The posing leaves to be desired as well. She is at an angle and in a position that really accentuates that arm pit. Instead of making her look busty, it makes her look thick. You need to have some of the belly to give a better perspective and make her look less thick. The fact that the arm in the foreground points toward the camera makes it also appear much thicker than it should. Look at the parts of her body here. That arm is HUGE compared to the rest of her. Much larger than her head even.
The positioning of the face is good overall in having that little bit of the other side of her face. I'd prefer she were looking toward camera left so that the far eye's iris wasn't attached to the nose so much.
the position of the far arm is good-the head is hiding any thickness there and allowing you to hide some of the arm. I'd still probably liquify some of the arm at the bottom towards the shoulder and that little bit of fat roll/muscle roll between the far bra strap and the arm. It's natural even on the thinnest of women, but it's something a woman would see and immediately say it looks like "I'm fat" when they aren't.

 

[MLeeK]

I know he was using 1/30 and its either out of focus or he has camera shake due to that shutter speed, Maybe 1/60 or something a bit faster.

To go to 1/60 he would have had to use ISO 200 since he was already at minimum aperture. Even at 1/30 it's borderline underexposed. Without any additional lighting ISO 200 could have introduced some noise. Personally I would have used some more light and THEN gone to 1/60 as well as a tighter aperture.

Noise? How could properly exposing with ANY amount of light be a noise problem at ISO 200? Or even 800 in this situation? I think I don't understand what you are saying?

 

[Geaux]

I'm by no means a retoucher. At the moment I'm really trying to nail lighting and framing.

Then why are you retouching the photo, turning her BW and adding cheesy words behind her? Looks ridiculous.


As others have said, original looks soft (due to shooting at 1.8) and underexposed.