Ok, my first Swimsuit beach shoot. C&C

[inTempus]

This is my first attempt at doing a swimwear/beach shoot. The model is from Model Mayhem, she's a great girl and was quite patient working with me as I tinkered with things.

What are your thoughts? Hit or miss? I'm pretty happy with it.

 

[DemonAstroth]

You are improving fast. I remember when I met you you seemed so casual about it.

As for the picture, from a completely amateur point of view, is not of my liking. I see it as a great sharp picture, but it just seems like a studio picture on the model, with a background added.

I know it's not, but it's the impression that I get from it. As if it is easily seen that the light is not natural.

I don't know if this is because of the equipment, or if it's because of my lack of knowledge, but I"m just sharing it with you.

On the other hand, your horror pictures and the toilet dude were my favorites. As it is obvious that there is some light manipulation but it's part of what you are presenting.

I hope I make sense, just trying to share my opinion.


EDIT:

OK, to make my point more clear and less convoluted. I simply feel that the light on the model is not the same as the light of the scene, which to me separates her from the scene. I don't see anyone else mentioning this, but it's what I see. In contrast, I remember this member (RMThompson) posted some models at a beach where they seem to fit into the scene. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rmthompson/3446536612/ That's from his flicker.

And as I seem to be getting fixated in something, I do want to mention that the technical aspects of it are great, she looks great and the focus is perfect, and i also love the shallow DOF.. even some of the grass blades seem to fit in with her bikini.

 

[dizzyg44]

She's stunning!

My only nitpick is the crooked horizon and body of water in the background leaking off the frame, but since your DOF is pretty shallow it's not as bad.

Nicely done.

 

[table1349]

It's a nice shot and a photogenic model.

I have only two observations.

One may be me since I haven't calibrated my monitor in a couple of weeks, but to me it looks like it could use a bit more saturation. It's just a little flat to me, but again, that could be my monitor.

My second one is the angle of the horizon. Again maybe it's just me but the combination of the land, sea and clouds in the sky all at the same not horizontal angle just tend to make my eyes focus on the fact that something is out of tilt. There is just too much in the background that is tilted and it draws my eyes to that. Without the clouds it might not be so pronounced.

 

[inTempus]

Thanks guys.

I shoot with the "fashion angle" on purpose. I guess I don't mind the angle of the horizon. If the trees in the background are cocked over or if it's the water line, it's all the same to me really. I just like different angles vs all perfectly level I suppose.

I doubt I change that style too much, I like it too much.

Gryphonslair, I keep my monitors calibrated. I wouldn't push the saturation any more as it would turn her skin orange.

 

[inTempus]

Here's another one with her doing a slightly different pose.

The horizon is cocked again though, but I love it. Hehe.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Rules, rules, rules.

I like the angled background in these shots.
Makes them a little more dynamic.

 

[Baaaark]

Uh, with portraits, IMO, are BETTER without straight horizons.

Not always, like when the background is close. But in shots like these, HELL YEAH!!!

 

[inTempus]

Whew, I'm glad I'm not the only one that likes breaking the rules every once in a while.

I'm a huge fan of not using perfectly horizontal shots... I know there's a time and place for them, but in fashion type stuff that's where they're most commonly used... or so I think. But then when I think it gets dangerous.

 

[Baaaark]

Whew, I'm glad I'm not the only one that likes breaking the rules every once in a while.

I'm a huge fan of not using perfectly horizontal shots... I know there's a time and place for them, but in fashion type stuff that's where they're most commonly used... or so I think. But then when I think it gets dangerous.

Keep the background level when the background symmetry is important. Otherwise, IMO its BORING!!!

 

[rufus5150]

Subject pretty, pose good, technicals executed well. I would have liked to see the lighting a bit more dynamic in the second one. If you look closely in the first, there are nice, soft and defining shadows. In the second, the light is really flat, overall. Also, a kicker or hairlight to really punch her away from the background would add to the image. The second pose also has a small distraction in that on her left cheek, there's some hair hanging down which ends up looking like a big wrinkle instead of hair.

Did you do any skin smoothing to her face? The skin tone and texture of the face is fairly different than the body, but mainly the forehead, tip of the nose of the cheekbones look unnaturally smooth. This could be done with makeup, but the juxtaposition with the skin tone of the rest of her really hit me first.

Overall, though, really nice shots.

 

[rufus5150]

Btw, I don't think your stuff qualifies as 'beginner' any more

 

[musicaleCA]

I got the same impression as DemonAstroth; that the light looks studio-like and un-natural. Perhaps a 1/2 CTO with WB on Daylight would warm up the light a touch and make it a tad more natural? Just a thought.

And yeah, he is improving fast, ain't he? I've seen Tharm's shots get better and better and I've been here for a mere three months. Yeesh!

Btw, I don't think your stuff qualifies as 'beginner' any more

Ditto.

 

[three_eyed_otter]

2nd photo...For what it's worth if you look at her foreground hips you can actually see the lines on her skin from the elastic in the bikini. Well, I assume they're from the bikini. Just somethin' to consider.

have a good one
3Eo

 

[inTempus]

Subject pretty, pose good, technicals executed well. I would have liked to see the lighting a bit more dynamic in the second one. If you look closely in the first, there are nice, soft and defining shadows. In the second, the light is really flat, overall. Also, a kicker or hairlight to really punch her away from the background would add to the image.

Great observations. Yes, I felt the same way. The first one was shot first, the second I had her turn more towards the light which cast different shadows. I brought a hair light, but realized after I got home it really was too much (blew highlights)... chalk it up to my noobness.

Did you do any skin smoothing to her face? The skin tone and texture of the face is fairly different than the body, but mainly the forehead, tip of the nose of the cheekbones look unnaturally smooth. This could be done with makeup, but the juxtaposition with the skin tone of the rest of her really hit me first.

Yup, on the first I just smoothed the face a little. You're right, it did look a little off. I re-edited it (new image posted in the first post in the thread). Now her whole body is smoothed and I brought down the lighting a little on her face, I felt it was too bright compared to the rest of her body.

Overall, though, really nice shots.

Thanks.