What's new

Nicki - Totally Safe for All Ages & Occupations

Ahhh, and in edit I made them more prominent. Damn!
 
So although she's dressed the shot is ok? I really wasn't sure about the light, it's direct skylight, albeit at a low angle at 7pm coming in from above.
 
Round eyes!!! :smileys:
 
Ahhh, and in edit I made them more prominent. Damn!

Tan lines are kind of "a thing" for some people...seems like some of those living north of 54-40 might be unaware of this little interest...

The light has an interesting quality to it. The dynamnic range it actually probably pretty wide. I "think" I know what the light looked like. I'm not sure if it is represented as well as it might be; the sheen on the couch fabric gives me a wonderful sense of the light, but the shoes drop off pretty fast...it might be tough to show it on digital without jumping through hoops..this kind of light is the light a late-afternoon or evening window makes when its beam enters a large, dark space...it's sort of soft, and also has a pretty steep drop-off at the edges. I have almost always,always had trouble with that kind of light on digital! Color negative film can handle it better, I think, but that stuff is dead to me. One thing about this light--it looks DIFFERENT. Not boring and all the same like light from a big softbox or umbrella. It adds a lot of character to the shot and the set. I am a big,big fan of her dress-love the way the hem of it is cut! Love that small posing couch too. Awesome piece of furniture for your new studio space, Bill!
 
I think the light is a little weird on both of these.


I like where you're going with it, but I find the drop off strange. In the first image, her feet and the bottom half of the image are underexposed. There's also a hot spot under her arm pit, which makes me feel like the light could have been lowered to cover the whole body.

the second shot suffers fromt he same issue from the waist down, but her legs are also very blue because of a different light sources. I think a reflector or fill light could have helped both these images.
 
I think #2 is much better. It has good light, good curves and a bit of tension. Her entire body is involved and her face is well defined.
#1 is off for me. The top half of her is at odds with the bottom half. Her face is undefined and essentially uninterested.
I would have tossed this one.
 
I think the light is a little weird on both of these.


I like where you're going with it, but I find the drop off strange. In the first image, her feet and the bottom half of the image are underexposed. There's also a hot spot under her arm pit, which makes me feel like the light could have been lowered to cover the whole body.

the second shot suffers front he same issue from the waist down, but her legs are also very blue because of a different light sources. I think a reflector or fill light could have helped both these images.

There are no lights to lower. Both images are in natural light. Yes, the second image is two toned, and that is a natural effect of the light from the window bouncing off the floor I suppose. There are not any hot spots but indeed there is a wide gamut of light.
 
I think the uneven light in these gives them a great natural feel, and that's why I like them. But I may still be wrong, I have noticed since joining this (wonderful) forum, that I have a little bit of an odd view on how I like lighting.:confused: So you may not want to listen to me!:mrgreen:
 
Well everyone's opinion is valid and I appreciate the time spent to give it. I can't say these are my favorites but they're definitely a bit out of my norm and I like that.
 
I was going to ask and forgot. What lenses did you use?
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom