What's new

Spring photo session with my gf

NiKonNoob86

TPF Noob!
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
21
Reaction score
21
Location
NJ
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
So it was a beautiful day in New Jersey yesterday so my girlfriend and I decided to take some pictures with my newly acquired d600! This was the first time i got to really use the d600 outdoors and the first time using reflectors.

1.
DSC_0698-6.jpg


2.
DSC_0698-5.jpg


3.
DSC_0698-4.jpg


4.
DSC_0698-3.jpg


5.
DSC_0683-3.jpg


6.
DSC_0682-3.jpg


7.
DSC_0611-5.jpg


8.
DSC_0611-4.jpg


9.
DSC_0611-3.jpg
 
Beautiful! That big stick in pic 1 is distracting my eyes from all of them, and you may enjoy having her slightly turn her body from the camera, not flat. And you may like some fill in her eyes/face on a few of 'em
bigthumb.gif
 
Colors look a little weird to me in all of them, but generally I like the photographs a lot. You've got a definite "look" going on here.

I'd like to see more of the shoes. They're kind of lost in these pictures, and they are clearly awesome.
 
2 is my favorite composition, however the right side of her shirt is blown out highlights and blends into the sky. 9 is a great shot too, the pics with her eyes looking at the camera are far better than those that she isn't.
 
Well, you started off with a beautiful, young woman, so that makes everything bad a lot less-bad than otherwise. SHoes? awesome! Foot tat? NICE! Faded, tight jeans???? AWESOME! Hair? Gorgeous!!! Makeup? Simple, good foundation, appropriate color for her hair, good lip color, eyebrows look great. Accessories--minimal and tasteful, timeless. Early-spring trees and empty railroad track with decent lighting? All good. The one,single thing that really kills these is that shirt...the straight line of the shirt from armpit down to the waist of the jeans in #3 makes her look very thick through the torso.

The shirt looked great in-person, I can tell. But on-film??? Not so much. The shirt adds like 25 pounds, visually, and that just ain't right! As amolitor mentioned, the shoes are pretty cool-looking. In shot #3, the foot chop and the shirt together hurt the shot.

Let's take a look at shot #8: that arms up, coy pose, shot head-to-waist-to-feet would have looked awesome as a "tall" frame. That is a classic feminine outdoor beauty pose that goes back decades, and she pulls it off well, but it's NOT a "wide" pose...it's a tall pose, from that camera position.

This shoot is good on 9 out of 10 metrics. If it were re-shot with a shirt that showed off her waist, in the same shoes and jeans and hairstyle, watch and earrings, it'd be a grand-slam home run. As shown, I'm gonna give it an RBI double!
 
Well, you started off with a beautiful, young woman, so that makes everything bad a lot less-bad than otherwise. SHoes? awesome! Foot tat? NICE! Faded, tight jeans???? AWESOME! Hair? Gorgeous!!! Makeup? Simple, good foundation, appropriate color for her hair, good lip color, eyebrows look great. Accessories--minimal and tasteful, timeless. Early-spring trees and empty railroad track with decent lighting? All good. The one,single thing that really kills these is that shirt...the straight line of the shirt from armpit down to the waist of the jeans in #3 makes her look very thick through the torso.

The shirt looked great in-person, I can tell. But on-film??? Not so much. The shirt adds like 25 pounds, visually, and that just ain't right! As amolitor mentioned, the shoes are pretty cool-looking. In shot #3, the foot chop and the shirt together hurt the shot.

Let's take a look at shot #8: that arms up, coy pose, shot head-to-waist-to-feet would have looked awesome as a "tall" frame. That is a classic feminine outdoor beauty pose that goes back decades, and she pulls it off well, but it's NOT a "wide" pose...it's a tall pose, from that camera position.

This shoot is good on 9 out of 10 metrics. If it were re-shot with a shirt that showed off her waist, in the same shoes and jeans and hairstyle, watch and earrings, it'd be a grand-slam home run. As shown, I'm gonna give it an RBI double!

Good stuff, Derrel.
 
Just a comment: one of the easiest things that could have helped the shirt would be to take a couple of good, stout clips, or clothespins, and simply "pinch in" the shirt in the back, out of camera view, so that it creates a visual impression of a waist. You will see that done ALL the time on catalog and fashion shoots, where the stylists pins or clips blouses, shirts,and jackets so that they appear to have a more-tailored fit, and create a nice "waistline" a little ways above the level of a skirt of pants-top. Pinching-in the clothing gives that gorgeous hourglass figure that so many people want to show off if they have it, and when they shoot off-the-rack clothing, it's usually a bit boxy for skinny models.

I saw a behind-the-scenes shoot of Candice Swanepoel and some stylist lady clipping Candice's clothing to fit right on Egotastic like 3 months ago...I laughed a bit...she had like 6 clamps on the shirt!!! Three on each side of the back!!
 
I really like these except for the shirt. A nice smudge shirt may have been better. I love the pose in #1 ! You got it going, and the lady is good at expression and posing. I like the exposure, it is unique.
 
Great critique Derrel! But what is an RBI double?
 
Great critique Derrel! But what is an RBI double?

It's a baseball term...it is a double, which advances a runner who scores...a run batted in double...which is nifty....it scores one run, and the batter makes it to second base. As opposed to the grand-slam home run, which scores FOUR runs.
 
Thanks for all the feedback guys! Derrel thanks for the compliments on my photos and my gf says thank you also! :) Some great info in your post. I will definitely try the clip/clothespin the next time.
 
Was this like an retro 80's senior shoot?
 

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.

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom