Michelle - Simply Beautiful (CC Requested!)

[Austin Greene]

I have no problem saying it, I was one damn lucky photographer today. I've been doing weekly (sometimes bi-weekly), impromptu, 45 minute photoshoots to build my portfolio and today Michelle responded. We'd tried to schedule a shoot last year, but an injury put her out. Anyways, I set out again with a single light, trying to stretch how much I can do with one light source. Daylight had already left us, but I was quite happy with the results.

Also, I typically hate selective coloring, but for some reason it just felt "right" when it comes to the photo below. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this one.

Hope you enjoy them, and I always appreciate your comments! I'm building up as much momentum as I can in the direction of portraiture.

Thanks!
Austin

1.

Michelle by TogaLive, on Flickr

2. BEFORE CRITIQUE

Michelle by TogaLive, on Flickr

2. AFTER CRITIQUE:

Michelle by TogaLive, on Flickr


3. BEFORE CRITIQUE

Michelle by TogaLive, on Flickr

3. AFTER CRITIQUE

Michelle by TogaLive, on Flickr


Thanks again for the CC! All photos taken with the 70-200 f/4 L IS, the Canon 6D, and a single flash.

 

[tirediron]

C&C per req:

1. Ummm, sorry, I DO NOT like this one. Even in colour I'd not be overly fond of it, but in selective colour...

2. I like this, the lighting is nice and the pose is appropriate, but a little more work on her skin wouldn't go amiss.

3. Great lighting here too, but her expression looks a little too serious and again some work on the skin is really needed.

Overall, some very nice work.

Just my $00.02 worth - your mileage may vary.

~John

 

[marie1128]

1. I'm not sure how I feel about this one. I think if it were an ad for some kind of hair product, it might work, but just as a picture, I'm confused by it.
2. Her body position feels a little awkward to me; she seems to be facing opposite sides at the same time.
3. I like the lighting, and this photo overall.

The more I look at #1 though, the more I begin to like it.

 

[Tailgunner]

1) doesn't do much for me
2) I really like this one but her arm color seems a little blown out
3) Looks great.

So is Michelle our Mod Michelle?

 

[rexbobcat]

I have to somewhat agree. The first is...interesting. I don't think the selective color works for it though. Honestly, I don't know of many situations where selective color looks good unless it natural to he scene.

The second is better. He lighting is a lot more "traditional," but it looks nice. I do wish there was more separation on the left side though. A little rim wouldn't hurt.

The third is pretty nice as well, however, I think it is also a good lesson in how lighting affects skin texture. I typically don't like to use side lighting with women too much unless I'm going for something kind of moody. The reason is because side lighting can accent ALL the texture in a person's skin, so any scars or pock marks show up more.

Think of how the sun shines on the moon. At the area where the dark side meets the light the craters are much more visible. It's the same concept.

That's why, when my main goal is flattery of the subject, I generally opt for soft, even natural light or butterfly/clamshell lighting to try and keep that uneven texture to a minimum.

That's not to as you can't use side lighting. I know several photographers who shoot high school senior girls with it. I just think it takes more retouching and can seem a bit off-putting when a beautiful girl is portrayed using classical Rembrandt lighting.

 

[Austin Greene]

C&C per req:

1. Ummm, sorry, I DO NOT like this one. Even in colour I'd not be overly fond of it, but in selective colour...

2. I like this, the lighting is nice and the pose is appropriate, but a little more work on her skin wouldn't go amiss.

3. Great lighting here too, but her expression looks a little too serious and again some work on the skin is really needed.

Overall, some very nice work.

Just my $00.02 worth - your mileage may vary.

~John

Thanks for the CC John! I was going for something less personal, and more retracted with #1, perhaps I missed my mark. I considered smoothing the skin more, but voted against it in an effort to preserve what I interpreted as a more natural quality. I'll go back and fiddle with it some more.

1. I'm not sure how I feel about this one. I think if it were an ad for some kind of hair product, it might work, but just as a picture, I'm confused by it.
2. Her body position feels a little awkward to me; she seems to be facing opposite sides at the same time.
3. I like the lighting, and this photo overall.

The more I look at #1 though, the more I begin to like it.

You and I are in the same boat as far as #1 goes!

1) doesn't do much for me
2) I really like this one but her arm color seems a little blown out
3) Looks great.

So is Michelle our Mod Michelle?

Thanks for the CC Tailgunner! Always appreciate it

I have to somewhat agree. The first is...interesting. I don't think the selective color works for it though. Honestly, I don't know of many situations where selective color looks good unless it natural to he scene.

The second is better. He lighting is a lot more "traditional," but it looks nice. I do wish there was more separation on the left side though. A little rim wouldn't hurt.

The third is pretty nice as well, however, I think it is also a good lesson in how lighting affects skin texture. I typically don't like to use side lighting with women too much unless I'm going for something kind of moody. The reason is because side lighting can accent ALL the texture in a person's skin, so any scars or pock marks show up more.

Think of how the sun shines on the moon. At the area where the dark side meets the light the craters are much more visible. It's the same concept.

That's why, when my main goal is flattery of the subject, I generally opt for soft, even natural light or butterfly/clamshell lighting to try and keep that uneven texture to a minimum.

That's not to as you can't use side lighting. I know several photographers who shoot high school senior girls with it. I just think it takes more retouching and can seem a bit off-putting when a beautiful girl is portrayed using classical Rembrandt lighting.

Out of curiosity, what would you do to improve the lighting on #2 provided you only had one flash? I already had a reflector camera left, so I felt pretty out of options when it comes to adding any rim as there was no daylight. As for the skin, I've already done about 50% smoothing across it, and felt like any more wouldn't appear natural. I'll reconsider though.

As always, thanks for the critique!

Anyone else?

 

[Derrel]

#2 is my favorite of the three, even though it does make her nose look a bit larger than it looks in the third photo. I like the pose, and her expression and her relationship to the lens in the second shot. #1 for me is an utter non-starter. The last shot doesn't really appeal to me, but it's also not negative, the way the first shot is. I'm not sure why the last shot doesn't engage me, it just...doesn't have the "appeal" of the second shot. Thinking about it for a bit, perhaps it's the way her face sort of appears out of darkness, or maybe it's the brightness of the highlights under the one eye, and everything else being dark and smooth, with no specularity...in shot #2 she is obviously seated, anchored, resting upon "something" (the concrete wall), where in #1 she's floating and in #3 she's sort of "floating"...maybe that's what's making those two shots less-appealing when seen around an "anchored" shot.

Still...you got a good shot on #2.

 

[rexbobcat]

C&C per req:

1. Ummm, sorry, I DO NOT like this one. Even in colour I'd not be overly fond of it, but in selective colour...

2. I like this, the lighting is nice and the pose is appropriate, but a little more work on her skin wouldn't go amiss.

3. Great lighting here too, but her expression looks a little too serious and again some work on the skin is really needed.

Overall, some very nice work.

Just my $00.02 worth - your mileage may vary.

~John

Thanks for the CC John! I was going for something less personal, and more retracted with #1, perhaps I missed my mark. I considered smoothing the skin more, but voted against it in an effort to preserve what I interpreted as a more natural quality. I'll go back and fiddle with it some more.

1. I'm not sure how I feel about this one. I think if it were an ad for some kind of hair product, it might work, but just as a picture, I'm confused by it.
2. Her body position feels a little awkward to me; she seems to be facing opposite sides at the same time.
3. I like the lighting, and this photo overall.

The more I look at #1 though, the more I begin to like it.

You and I are in the same boat as far as #1 goes!

1) doesn't do much for me
2) I really like this one but her arm color seems a little blown out
3) Looks great.

So is Michelle our Mod Michelle?

Thanks for the CC Tailgunner! Always appreciate it

I have to somewhat agree. The first is...interesting. I don't think the selective color works for it though. Honestly, I don't know of many situations where selective color looks good unless it natural to he scene.

The second is better. He lighting is a lot more "traditional," but it looks nice. I do wish there was more separation on the left side though. A little rim wouldn't hurt.

The third is pretty nice as well, however, I think it is also a good lesson in how lighting affects skin texture. I typically don't like to use side lighting with women too much unless I'm going for something kind of moody. The reason is because side lighting can accent ALL the texture in a person's skin, so any scars or pock marks show up more.

Think of how the sun shines on the moon. At the area where the dark side meets the light the craters are much more visible. It's the same concept.

That's why, when my main goal is flattery of the subject, I generally opt for soft, even natural light or butterfly/clamshell lighting to try and keep that uneven texture to a minimum.

That's not to as you can't use side lighting. I know several photographers who shoot high school senior girls with it. I just think it takes more retouching and can seem a bit off-putting when a beautiful girl is portrayed using classical Rembrandt lighting.

Out of curiosity, what would you do to improve the lighting on #2 provided you only had one flash? I already had a reflector camera left, so I felt pretty out of options when it comes to adding any rim as there was no daylight. As for the skin, I've already done about 50% smoothing across it, and felt like any more wouldn't appear natural. I'll reconsider though.

As always, thanks for the critique!

Anyone else?

Honestly the lighting in 2 is probably the best out of the three. It's true Rembrandt while the light in the third is "loop" lighting because of the shadow off of the nose. When compared to Rembrandt, the loop just seems rather weak in a sense.

If you only have one light like that, consider investing in a larger modifier or an extra scrim, just something to get that light softer. If you use a bigger modifier it should allow the light to wrap more, eliminating some of those dramatic dark shadows ( if that's what you want). It'll also help with the blemishes.

I don't really think it's in issue of global skin smoothing. It's mostly just larger blemishes such as those on her chin. Whatever texture is closest to he transition from light to shadow will be most noticeable, so focus on that an the rest shouldn't be too bad.

 

[rexbobcat]

But also, if you want to draw attention away from those spots, adding a second light to add another point of interest and using a reflectors to open up those shadows does help.

 

[weepete]

I like the first the best, it's a bit dark and odd but I think the selective colouring works here because it draws the focal point away slightly from her face and with the eyes which would be our not.so focal point for this kind of shot.

The shadowed face and slight smile make it kinda off kilter too quick I like

 

[Austin Greene]

I've gone back and updated some of the skin issues. What do you guys think?

4.

Michelle by TogaLive, on Flickr

5.

Michelle by TogaLive, on Flickr

Also, here is the first image without selective coloring. I felt that the shirt pulled too much away from her hair and face in this one, hence my giving the selective coloring a go.

6.

Michelle by TogaLive, on Flickr

 

[yahgiggle]

i like all 3, also i am a big fan of selective coloring, Shes got Awesome brown eyes, i do how ever think number 2 is the better one then 3 and last 1, with 1 its not the
selective coloring i have a problem with, its how dark her face is that i don't like. good work anyway

 

[Tailgunner]

I really like the pose in #4. Anyhow, I like the improvements.