Portrait Shot for C&C

dandaluzphotography · May 18, 2011

Hey Guys,

I posted the below earlier in another section of the forum.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/beyond-basics/244623-portrait-c-c.html

Based on the critique and my own hindsight, I edited the same pic to what's attached in this post. Please let me know what you think.

This pic was taken in my home studio. I am using one monolight on camera right and a silver reflector on camera left and fairly close to the subject and adjusted to fill in some of the shadows on the subject's right side of the face.

Camera setting are 1/200th, f/8, ISO 100

Some minor retouching and blemish removal. I also changed the crop from the original post.

Thanks,
Danny

skieur · May 18, 2011

This pose is definitely not flattering to the model. It is generally considered to be a self-protective position as if the model is afraid of the photographer. The backs of hands tend to distract from the face and be unflattering as well, so most portrait photographers avoid them and shoot hands from the side if they are in a shot at all. The pattern and colour of the turtleneck also distracts from the eyes which are supposed to be the centre of interest in any portrait. The pasted-on smirk is not the right expression either to contribute to the portrait.

skieur

dandaluzphotography · May 18, 2011

skieur said:
This pose is definitely not flattering to the model. It is generally considered to be a self-protective position as if the model is afraid of the photographer. The backs of hands tend to distract from the face and be unflattering as well, so most portrait photographers avoid them and shoot hands from the side if they are in a shot at all. The pattern and colour of the turtleneck also distracts from the eyes which are supposed to be the centre of interest in any portrait. The pasted-on smirk is not the right expression either to contribute to the portrait.

skieur

Thanks for the feedback. I'll definitely keep that in mind for the next shot. Now, as far as the technical aspects of the shot, what are you thoughts?

Derrel · May 18, 2011

Tough crowd. The lighting is decent, although unremarkable,and not without room for improvement. The way the light is raked across her from camera right shows a lot of shape and detail, since it has some shadowing. I think the main light is a little bit too close to her, and I'll tell you why: the amount of light fall-off from the right hand side to the left hand side of the photo is a bit more extreme than you want to have when working in this lower key or register. Look at her forehead and her hand on the right hand side of the frame--we see overexposed areas. Then, look at the forehead and the hand on the left hand side of the frame--the degree of fall-off in light intensity is just a bit too much.

Her hand on the right hand side of the frame also shows that the main light is coming in from a rather low angle...and a bit much off to the side...

If the main light had been backed a bit more away from here, there would have been a more-gradual fall-off in light intensity across the frame. What's going on here is that due to the Inverse Square law, when the main light is "too close" to the subject, the light loses intensity VERY rapidly with each little bit of distance away from the light, and that's what I sense from looking at this shot.

dandaluzphotography · May 18, 2011

Derrel said:
Tough crowd. The lighting is decent, although unremarkable,and not without room for improvement. The way the light is raked across her from camera right shows a lot of shape and detail, since it has some shadowing. I think the main light is a little bit too close to her, and I'll tell you why: the amount of light fall-off from the right hand side to the left hand side of the photo is a bit more extreme than you want to have when working in this lower key or register. Look at her forehead and her hand on the right hand side of the frame--we see overexposed areas. Then, look at the forehead and the hand on the left hand side of the frame--the degree of fall-off in light intensity is just a bit too much.

Her hand on the right hand side of the frame also shows that the main light is coming in from a rather low angle...and a bit much off to the side...

If the main light had been backed a bit more away from here, there would have been a more-gradual fall-off in light intensity across the frame. What's going on here is that due to the Inverse Square law, when the main light is "too close" to the subject, the light loses intensity VERY rapidly with each little bit of distance away from the light, and that's what I sense from looking at this shot.

This is more of what I was looking for. Posing is VERY important but I'm more focused (right now) on getting the lighting right.

As far as the key light from camera right, it was at the subject's 10 o'clock and about 6 feet away and about eye level. I could have moved it back further, but could I have just lowered the intensity of the flash? I saw another critique that mentioned the key light's height was too low. I'll make these adjustments for the next shot, as well as try to come up with a more flattering pose. Let's see what I can get. I'll post it soon.

dandaluzphotography · May 18, 2011

Derrel said:
If the main light had been backed a bit more away from here, there would have been a more-gradual fall-off in light intensity across the frame. What's going on here is that due to the Inverse Square law, when the main light is "too close" to the subject, the light loses intensity VERY rapidly with each little bit of distance away from the light, and that's what I sense from looking at this shot.

I've heard the term "Inverse Square Law" before but never looked it up. I just did and this is KEY to understand. It seems counter intuitive but I get it. I found this video on YouTube from Adorama TV where Mark Wallace explains what it is and shows it in practice. Very good video.

Danny

NayLoMo6C · May 18, 2011

her pose makes her look like shes ready to be entombed next to king tut

MWG · May 18, 2011

LOL. Agreed with whats been said. A different pose/outfit could have been a great shoot. This was good practice, now do it again! lol

Listen to Derrel, he knows his ****.:thumbup: