"modeling" c&c

[goodoneian]

i took some pictures of my girlfriend yesterday in a spare room in my house, and am pretty happy with the results. i put forth more effort than usual with my light setups and post work, so tell me what you think

 

[fokker]

I'm not the best to give C&C as I'm pretty noob, but from what I can see:
-White balance is diff between the two shots
-Second is slightly overexposed

Otherwise great shots, and nice girlfriend too

 

[chammer]

i dont wish to be rude but i want to be honest. i cant tell if its her pose or the dress in the first, but it makes her look like she has a bit of a belly. not very flattering. in the second shot she's slouching an awful lot, and with her being straight on its making her appear wide. again, not very flattering. i do like her look though, but i think the posing needs a bit of work. the images themselves appear to be quite nice, but i agree...the white balance appears to differ between the two (or maybe it was a change in lighting or exposure settings).

i'd take what i said with a grain of salt though as you're several steps ahead of me with having someone model for you and the lighting to do so. in that regard, great job!

 

[Yemme]

Great hair cut. I like the angle of her head in the first shot. I see the pose and referrance to shaping, but it's good. The color of the dress is great for her complection. You did a great job with the lighting. The only thing I have an issue with is her legs in the second. The one on the right.

 

[Big Mike]

Lighting is pretty good, although it's pretty flat in the 2nd image. For a typical portrait type shot, you want to have a ratio on the model's face. Although, the flatter lighting is fairly common is fashion & glamor.

The posing really needs some work though. This is something that you can practice at the same time you are practicing your lighting.

 

[eric-holmes]

Left hand positioning in the first one is weird. It somehow makes her wrist funny.

 

[goodoneian]

as far as the white balance difference, they're the same exposure and edited essentially the same in camera raw with the same wb temperature, but processed slightly different once i opened them in photoshop. i do agree the second looks flatish compared to the first one.

and as far as posing goes i've been trying to work on that as well but that's definitely one of my weak points that i'm still working on

thank you for the compliments though

 

[DScience]

I'm not the best to give C&C as I'm pretty noob, but from what I can see:
-White balance is diff between the two shots
-Second is slightly overexposed

Otherwise great shots, and nice girlfriend too

I'm sorry but you shouldn't respond unless you KNOW what your talking about.


First, the white balance isn't different between the two and the second is in no way overexposed. Seriously, back off the C&C if you don't know what your talking about.

 

[chemqueen]

I'd have her not face the camera straight on, but like the lighting on her face.

 

[Derrel]

What do I think? I think you're a lucky man. The girl's got it goin' on! Her hair looks great,and she's all real. Your hair lighting looks pretty good, but I think the background lighting is a bit too bright. On the first shot, her tank top needs styling on her left side where there's a lengthy crease in the fabric. In the second photo, her leg position is not flattering.

Overall, the lighting is rather low-ratio, but yet yours light sources are not so huge that there's no definition; I can see that the edges of her arms and legs have some darkening, which adds shape,and you actually have her hair lighted quite well-ample light on the hair to see its cut and color, plus the nice accent light on the hair.

I think the area where the shots fall down is in the wardrobe selection; she's put together very well in key areas--face, hair, bust,nose, eyes,hair,waist,arms,legs,complexion,makeup---but the outfit she's wearing is not helping. With better wardrobe and slightly better posing, these would be really good. Your lighting, her makeup, all decent. But that high-waisted aqua skirt with the black belt is just not maximizing what's in front of the lens.

 

[fokker]

I'm not the best to give C&C as I'm pretty noob, but from what I can see:
-White balance is diff between the two shots
-Second is slightly overexposed

Otherwise great shots, and nice girlfriend too

I'm sorry but you shouldn't respond unless you KNOW what your talking about.


First, the white balance isn't different between the two and the second is in no way overexposed. Seriously, back off the C&C if you don't know what your talking about.

And you should probably back off the responoses until your period goes away.

I offered my opinion - stating that it is should not be taken as gospel. And I still stand by my statements. just because I'm a noob doesn't mean I don't have eyes or opinions, and I'm pretty sure the OP wants opinions from how people view his work (and yes, in the fashion world, you do not have to be a photography snob to look at a photo).

So, how do you explain the difference in colouring beween the two photos? (white part of the dress in particular)

 

[kundalini]

#1 is the stronger image. A few things I noticed right off the bat.....

The angles you've got a really well done with her arms.

Left hand position is very masculine. A much better position IMO would be for her to cup her bottom. It would not only add to the sensuality, but also reduce the size (as seen) of her hand. From all my reading and observation, the back of a woman's hand should not be square to the camera.

I'm no fashion-eesta, but.....

The crease and fold of her skirt at the crotch is not very flattering.

The muted, neutral color of her top seems to be dingy. Either the bra is too small or her shoulder position (which is quite nice) is causing folds to form below the armpit.

I'm not a fan of the high waisted wardrobe some women like.

The crop is very close to the knee. Perhaps raise that a tad.

The background color doesn't work for me. Consider to either blow it out or to gel with color. I would also like to see a bit more shadow on the right side of her face.

She is gorgeous and you are a lucky man. These are opinions only.... salt block in tow.

 

[chammer]

So, how do you explain the difference in colouring beween the two photos? (white part of the dress in particular)

i agree with everything you said, but this part i quoted...this is what drew me to the same thing. the color of the shirt is slightly different, and in the second, portions seem to be blown out (but the histogram in photoshop doesnt seem to support that). her face is also lit differently (more so in the second). the op states that the exposure was the same between the shots, however. *shrug*

 

[goodoneian]

I'm not the best to give C&C as I'm pretty noob, but from what I can see:
-White balance is diff between the two shots
-Second is slightly overexposed

Otherwise great shots, and nice girlfriend too

I'm sorry but you shouldn't respond unless you KNOW what your talking about.


First, the white balance isn't different between the two and the second is in no way overexposed. Seriously, back off the C&C if you don't know what your talking about.

So, how do you explain the difference in colouring beween the two photos? (white part of the dress in particular)

when you say white blanace, i think of the color temperature of the two images. they're both 5400k. and as far as the different exposure, there's a pretty good change she was a tad closer to the lights in the second picture rather than the first one.

and as i said, the different colors/ tones is due to me processing them differently. i didn't want to do them both identical and felt like playing around some. the majority of the adjustments are the same, save for curves and various color balance adjustments

 

[Kimba]

i think it was a great try. i'm with everyone else on the poses and if you are planning to shoot other people especially woman you need to see things from their perspective. in the first shot the pose gives her a fat roll under her arm near her boob, she's not a large lady so some repossitioning and looking at the shot in the camera a little more cliosely will see you taking great shots in no time. I like where your going