Natural light portraits

[ADavis85]

Just playing around, trying my hand at some simple portraiture. Nothing special, and I'm sure they need work...I'm willing to take any critiques you may have so that I can improve my technique.

These were taken with no flash, no reflector, nothing; and yes, I do have a flash...I was purposefully not using it. Kind of a test for my new camera's ISO performance. There is some PP...simple stuff in Lightroom; WB, Exposure, curves, sharpening etc.


Robbo by ACDavis85, on Flickr


What are you lookin at? by ACDavis85, on Flickr

This one's just having a little fun. Rob hasn't cut his hair for a while.

Rob has hair by ACDavis85, on Flickr

Anyway, I liked the way these came out. I'm sure they're not perfect...I was just having some fun, and thought I'd share. Thanks for looking!

 

[groan]

looks good!
The last one, what would it look like if you blew out the background to up his exposure a bit or is there nothing to work with at that exposure?
The top one seems a bit over, but it could be my monitor.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

If you're going to exclude light, a reflector may be helpful with making your subject pop.

 

[ADavis85]

looks good!
The last one, what would it look like if you blew out the background to up his exposure a bit or is there nothing to work with at that exposure?
The top one seems a bit over, but it could be my monitor.

Thanks!

The last one, there's definitely room to work (gotta love RAW ) there. I actually used a graduated filter to darken the exposure on the background...I thought it played more to the grungy style I was looking for there. However, I could use another graduated filter, and bring up the exposure on him and his face.

The first one might be a little over...I was thinking that, but wanted a second opinion. I'll do some re-edits on those and re-post tonight.

I appreciate the feedback!

 

[LuckySe7en]

They look soft. Were these handheld? I like the 3rd one best. I would use the adjustment brush on the subject to kick up the exposure a bit

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Be careful increasing exposure/brightness in face using post software, anything more than a half stop or so....well you know...

 

[ADavis85]

If you're going to exclude light, a reflector may be helpful with making your subject pop.

Yeah, that's definitely next on my list of things to buy. Also bare in mind...the first two were actually taken in quite low-light, although there was a street lamp close by. I'll try that next time! Thanks for the tip.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

If you're going to exclude light, a reflector may be helpful with making your subject pop.

Yeah, that's definitely next on my list of things to buy. Also bare in mind...the first two were actually taken in quite low-light, although there was a street lamp close by. I'll try that next time! Thanks for the tip.

Yeah reflectors are fairly cheap too. On the fly I've even used a silver car dash protector

 

[ADavis85]

They look soft. Were these handheld? I like the 3rd one best. I would use the adjustment brush on the subject to kick up the exposure a bit

Yes, handheld. I'll do that tonight, and re-post. Thanks for the tip!

Be careful increasing exposure/brightness in face using post software, anything more than a half stop or so....well you know...

Yeah definitely. I don't usually touch 'Brightness' much anyway, I may bump Contrast a bit, and use Fill Light or Exposure to compensate.

 

[ADavis85]

HA! I didn't even think about that. I do have one, unfortunately I don't take my car to the city much...I just hop on the Metro. But I may just take one next time...it's a bright shiny silver too. I think my one friend actually has a reflector I may borrow as well. I don't have any experience with them yet...so definitely something to practice.

 

[Christie Photo]

I do have a flash...I was purposefully not using it. Kind of a test for my new camera's ISO performance.

Just don't confuse "adequate" lighting with "proper" lighting.

In other words, having enough light to achieve a printable exposure doesn't necessarily mean the light is of the quality it should be... or falling where is should be... which in both cases is what and where YOU choose it should be.

Adding light is not always the answer. Sometimes you'll have to manipulate the lighting. It requires that you learn how to "see light." This takes a bit of training, but no worries... it's not rocket science. Books, videos and workshops will get you going.

I recommend a tripod before the reflector. Both are important, but I feel a stable camera should come first.

Good luck!

-Pete

 

[MReid]

Natural light means using natural light, not just taking a picture where ever in what ever light is there.
Look for good light, and use it to it's potential, it is there somewhere.
Reflections, street lights, from the sky, orient your subject and backgrounds to make best use of the light.

Late in the evening is some of the best natural light there is. Learn to read your histogram, expose for your subject.

 

[ADavis85]

I do have a flash...I was purposefully not using it. Kind of a test for my new camera's ISO performance.

Just don't confuse "adequate" lighting with "proper" lighting.

In other words, having enough light to achieve a printable exposure doesn't necessarily mean the light is of the quality it should be... or falling where is should be... which in both cases is what and where YOU choose it should be.

Adding light is not always the answer. Sometimes you'll have to manipulate the lighting. It requires that you learn how to "see light." This takes a bit of training, but no worries... it's not rocket science. Books, videos and workshops will get you going.

I recommend a tripod before the reflector. Both are important, but I feel a stable camera should come first.

Good luck!

-Pete

Thanks Pete, I appreciate the comments. I do understand the difference between adequate and proper light. I was, in no way, saying I had proper light in these cases. I just thought I did pretty good with what I had. That being said, I have a tripod, and a flash. This trip was more about challenging myself with nothing more than ambient (since "natural" was apparently the incorrect term) light, my camera, and a 50mm lens. I'll definitely do some studying on "seeing light". Thanks again for the comment, and advice. But how do you feel about the three exposures as they are? Baring in mind that they are (purposefully) done with ambient light?

Natural light means using natural light, not just taking a picture where ever in what ever light is there.
Look for good light, and use it to it's potential, it is there somewhere.
Reflections, street lights, from the sky, orient your subject and backgrounds to make best use of the light.

Late in the evening is some of the best natural light there is. Learn to read your histogram, expose for your subject.

Thanks for the clarification. I was simply trying to make a title that would let someone know, before viewing the thread, that I didn't use any flash/studio lighting.

I also appreciate the tips about the background etc, I'll keep that in mind next time.

Also, just so that I'm clear...these are not professional shots (hold your comments about how they're obviously not pro-quality, I never claimed they were). This was not a paying customer. Just my good friend, volunteering to be my subject for a little while. I would appreciate comments/critiques on how the pictures look as they are. Meaning, I know that a reflector/tripod/etc would've been ideal...however I did not have any intention of using them as I wanted to see what I could come up with, with just my camera. Also, I do appreciate everything everyone has said so far...I value your opinions, as I want to better my technique and knowledge on this subject. I'm getting better, and want to continue to improve.

Thanks again, everyone, for looking and commenting!