My Best Friend Crystal

[danicali]

Here are some of my favorite photos I've shot of my best friend.

(From oldest to newest)

 

[frommrstomommy]

I like these but your editing seems all over the board? They don't seem consistent at all.

 

[sscarmack]

I like these but your editing seems all over the board? They don't seem consistent at all.

I was just thinking that and didn't know how to say it without being mean. Glad you did haha

 

[LCLimages]

Oh, I think some of them are inconsistent but mostly only in WB. There are a couple that do seem much warmer than the others.

I like these. My favorite is the 2nd row, far right. Beautiful.

 

[Designer]

For some reason I like #3 out of all these. #3 is composed somewhat oddly, but the dappled light doesn't seem to hurt it much.

The rest of them have composition and/or lighting issues. #9 has the best composition, so if you only had some fill light on the near side, it would be quite good.

 

[tirediron]

Agree with the points raised above and will add that almost every one of these would have benefitted greatly from the addition of some fill light.

 

[Derrel]

Crystal is a very attractive young woman, and her great attitude comes through in most of these. I think the inconsistency part is largely because there are from several different shoots, spanning a fair amount of time, so yeah, they are "different". My favorites are the two where she's lying in the grass and looking upward, and also the one where she's walking the light-colored horse as the sun sets, since that's a really romantic setting.

I saw your earlier thread about getting more business, and spent a few minutes clicking through the entire 2014 and 2013 Photos galleries on FB. You've made a big improvement since 2013. I noticed Tirediron mentioned "fill light", and I saw the same issue in 2013's FB galleries. I think one area that your work needs to address is how you place your people and your camera in relation to the natural light. You're shooting a lot of back-lighted and side-lighted stuff, and when I look at the images FULL-sized I see soft images that have a slight overall veiling glare, which I am thinking comes from a kit-grade lens shot wide-open, and I also see digital noise in the backlighting or low-light shots. I think you need to start thinking about a different approach to how you position your subjects in relation to the sunlight, and if you want to keep shooting this backlighted stuff with no fill, you need 1) a modern camera with VERY good dynamic range AND great High-ISO capability and 2) a better lens that can produce contrasty, and SHARP images when shot in flat light. I notice an improvement from the 2013 to the 2014 FDB galleries in terms of better use of light's direction.

You need to get some contrast and tone-differentiation in the shadow areas. There are solutions you can buy that will do that, good, quality lenses that will do that, shot after shot. You can also work on shooting with more side-lighting too, and even front-lighting, like the shot of the horse being walked into the sunset...the horse has a nice ass-end, yes, and Crystal looks cute walking away, yeah, but I bet she looked simply radiant with that late-day sunlight hitting her in the face...that shot from the front would be very different, with that golden light hitting her and the horse in their faces. A really GOOD, fast 50mm or fast 85mm prime would really help in situations like this. WHat I am saying is something KmH mentions a lot: the direction and quality of the lighting is what determines how good the pictures look.

MOST of these are great ideas, but the way the lighting is used is less than optimal...like the horse's ears against a strong, late-afternoon sky, called a "bald sky"... shots 4 and 9 have a gorgeous horse and an even more beautiful woman, but that doggone white, empty sky hurts. The strong side-lighting is lovely lighting, but it needs to be shown with rich, crisp shadow detail: this is where a good lens hood, and a very contrasty lens like a Nikon 105 DC or a Canon 135/2 L is every photographer's BEST friend; a lens that can shoot right INTO the light, not flare, not ghost, and can deliver contrast and separate out the low-tone values even when shot toward the light. (If you want to, you could also add a 1/16 power squirt of flash and BOOM...you're golden.)

I see a photographer who could use about four specific pieces of gear that would up her results quality within a short time frame.

 

[imagemaker46]

To be honest, I really like the shot of the girl walking the horse, it has a nice feel to it. Derrel is right about the others.

 

[Braineack]

They all seem very soft/lack-of-detail at full screen, especially #2. The last two look good, but maybe just a tad too narrow on the DOF.

 

[danicali]

I like these but your editing seems all over the board? They don't seem consistent at all.

Thank you and I agree. While editing, I do something I really like, it doesn't seem to transfer to other photos. I know I need to be consistent with my editing but that will require more play and learning.

 

[danicali]

Agree with the points raised above and will add that almost every one of these would have benefitted greatly from the addition of some fill light.

Please excuse the question, as it may seem "dumb", but what is fill light?

Thanks your advice!

 

[danicali]

...I bet she looked simply radiant with that late-day sunlight hitting her in the face...that shot from the front would be very different, with that golden light hitting her and the horse in their faces. A really GOOD, fast 50mm or fast 85mm prime would really help in situations like this. WHat I am saying is something KmH mentions a lot: the direction and quality of the lighting is what determines how good the pictures look.

MOST of these are great ideas, but the way the lighting is used is less than optimal...like the horse's ears against a strong, late-afternoon sky, called a "bald sky"... shots 4 and 9 have a gorgeous horse and an even more beautiful woman, but that doggone white, empty sky hurts. The strong side-lighting is lovely lighting, but it needs to be shown with rich, crisp shadow detail: this is where a good lens hood, and a very contrasty lens like a Nikon 105 DC or a Canon 135/2 L is every photographer's BEST friend; a lens that can shoot right INTO the light, not flare, not ghost, and can deliver contrast and separate out the low-tone values even when shot toward the light. (If you want to, you could also add a 1/16 power squirt of flash and BOOM...you're golden.)

I see a photographer who could use about four specific pieces of gear that would up her results quality within a short time frame.

Thank you Derrel! I really appreciate it!

When you talk about shooting with light hitting my model's face I agree with you that Crystal would have looked INCREDIBLE with the sunlight on her face but, I have found that my subjects tend to squint and I get harsh lighting when I post-process. What am I doing wrong?


Again, thank you for your advice!

 

[danicali]

Thank you all for your feedback! It is greatly appreciated. It's obvious that I have a lot to learn but that's why I am here

 

[frommrstomommy]

I like these but your editing seems all over the board? They don't seem consistent at all.

Thank you and I agree. While editing, I do something I really like, it doesn't seem to transfer to other photos. I know I need to be consistent with my editing but that will require more play and learning.

what program are you editing in?

I completely know what you mean about it "not transferring" to other photos. I think there are definitely at least a handful of adjustments that should "transfer" though and then some adjustments would just need tweaking to be suitable for other photos.

 

[danicali]

what program are you editing in? I completely know what you mean about it "not transferring" to other photos. I think there are definitely at least a handful of adjustments that should "transfer" though and then some adjustments would just need tweaking to be suitable for other photos.

I currently have Photoshop Elements 10? I think it's 10 lol. I've heard a lot about Lightroom so I've been looking into that.