My first time attempting to do portraits and would like some C&C

[Derrel]

Ron's re-work still looks "faked", but at the same time, it has a certain almost-campy, almost whimsical "look" to it...I mean...hey, I'm not sure if "regular, non-photography people" could point out why it looks the way it does. But I think they might like it for what it does: it REALLY puts the focus "on the couple".

 

[ronlane]

Ron's re-work still looks "faked", but at the same time, it has a certain almost-campy, almost whimsical "look" to it...I mean...hey, I'm not sure if "regular, non-photography people" could point out why it looks the way it does. But I think they might like it for what it does: it REALLY puts the focus "on the couple".

You are correct Sir, it still looks faked. Still not sure how to make it focus on them without making it look faked to an extent.

 

[DiskoJoe]

Any specific reason you chose not to utilize a lower f-stop for these given that you had the option? These are screaming for some seperation between the subject and background.

When I asked my sister-in-law what she wanted. She told me that she would like to have the background in focus as well (her words). So I shot about a 70/30 mixture being 70% of the shots were at a higher f-stop and 30% were lower. I did shoot some of the photos at 2.8, however, due to some poor location choice on my part fpr those photos. They did not turn out well as the background was far too bright and the subjects were far too dark.

if they came out dark then you didnt meter correctly.

 

[SashaT]

Thanks again to everybody that has chimed in; It looks like I have some things to improve on. I will take the suggestions and give it another go... The fun thing for me with this hobby is that there is always something new to learn. Thank you again all for the comments and suggestions.

 

[hirejn]

The location is good. Outdoor shots usually benefit from controlled lighting. Notice the dark eye sockets in photo 1. Flash, or a reflector, will fill that in for a more flattering look. Even just a pop of TTL -1 or -2 is enough to fill the shadows and provide a nice warmth. I do this often at weddings for shots of the bridal party outside, just put the flash on TTL and go -1 or -2 to fill. I'll often have lights on a stand for outdoor group shots and just pop in some fill with TTL. That's the beauty of TTL; simple and fast, when you know how to use it. Also be specific about direction of light; you rarely want to light someone straight on. For an engagement or other portrait, I'm usually actively controlling light in some way.

Lighting aside, the 60 isn't a bad lens but if you have something longer, experiment with it, and try to throw the backgrounds out of focus more. Longer lenses have good portrait characteristics. Also, see how the feet become larger than the head within the frame? This is a perspective problem that longer lenses can correct. A wide lens exaggerates more in size the objects that are closer to it, while a longer lens will compress features and enable you to crop out problem areas. The subject told you she wanted the background in focus? Since when do the subjects make artistic decisions? What would they rather have, the background looking good, or themselves looking good? You're the photographer. You make the best photograph possible. If the client won't give up, take one shot their way and then go to yours. You may not see it but the couple looks a bit stiff. Leaning heads together is a good way to show more of a connection of love and acknowledgement of the other person.

 

[Braineack]

i did this REALLY fast, but look how much more they pop with a little bokeh/blur:

It looks fake.

of course it looks fake; it is. I wasn't suggesting to create it in PS like i did, I was merely showing how a larger aperture could have produced something similar and really helped pull the subject out from the BG. I would reshoot this before I'd attempt a faked blurred BG.

 

[DanOstergren]

i did this REALLY fast, but look how much more they pop with a little bokeh/blur:

It looks fake.

of course it looks fake; it is. I wasn't suggesting to create it in PS like i did, I was merely showing how a larger aperture could have produced something similar and really helped pull the subject out from the BG. I would reshoot this before I'd attempt a faked blurred BG.

I agree. Although others here are recommending editing to get this look simply because some clients like the edited look, I would only use these edits as examples of why one could use a wider aperture. In my opinion edited blur never looks good, and although some people may like it, it's up to us as good photographers to use our better judgement and use the right lens and setting to get a better quality result.

 

[michael9000000]

I am also new at photography, and am interested in portraits and people photography especially.

This is a picture taken of my husband, in a typical 'business portfolio portrait' setting, taken at home
with a curtain as a background, 1 soft box used. I can't seem to get the lighting to fall the way I want it to, or am I being to hard on myself? (the soft box is a bit bright and have to move it back quite far bit). C&C?

View attachment 60831

You will get a lot of great feedback if you start a separate thread asking for C&C. I'm sure you didn't mean any harm and you might not be accustomed to this forum, but right now you're 'hijacking' someone else's thread. Cheers!

 

[kemem28]

I am also new at photography, and am interested in portraits and people photography especially.

This is a picture taken of my husband, in a typical 'business portfolio portrait' setting, taken at home
with a curtain as a background, 1 soft box used. I can't seem to get the lighting to fall the way I want it to, or am I being to hard on myself? (the soft box is a bit bright and have to move it back quite far). C&C?

You will get a lot of great feedback if you start a separate thread asking for C&C. I'm sure you didn't mean any harm and you might not be accustomed to this forum, but right now you're 'hijacking' someone else's thread. Cheers!

Apologies! Will do, thank you!

 

[michael9000000]

I am also new at photography, and am interested in portraits and people photography especially.

This is a picture taken of my husband, in a typical 'business portfolio portrait' setting, taken at home
with a curtain as a background, 1 soft box used. I can't seem to get the lighting to fall the way I want it to, or am I being to hard on myself? (the soft box is a bit bright and have to move it back quite far). C&C?

You will get a lot of great feedback if you start a separate thread asking for C&C. I'm sure you didn't mean any harm and you might not be accustomed to this forum, but right now you're 'hijacking' someone else's thread. Cheers!

Apologies! Will do, thank you!

No worries. I look forward to seeing more of your work... In your own thread...

 

[dvjproductions]

- The poses are natural and comfortable looking for the most part, however, there is some stiffness in #1

- I would like to have seen these shot tighter. Not worth a crop at this point though.

- I agree with blurring out the background, even if only slightly to give some separation.

- I dislike the edits completely, I feel they cheapen the image.

 

[DougGrigg]

I think everyone had the same idea in mind in terms of how it could be captured haha!

 

[SashaT]

I wasn't going to post these at first as I did not feel they were great. Then I though what the hell, the only way to improve is to get some honest feedback. One big takeaway for me is to go with what I feel is right. I know what my issue with that was though. Never having really done this before, I basically just listened to what she said she wanted and tried to create it. I really have some ideas now as what to do and not do the next time.