“The Duchess…”

[enezdez13 4]

D850
f/8.0
ISO 64
1/160 Sec.
70 - 200 mm - f/2.8E FL ED VR
98 mm

OCF Data Not/Available

(Processed In LR & Color Efex Pro 4)

I went to a portrait workshop with various workstations (where they handed you the flash transmitter for that station); thus the information is unavailable.

Thanks For Looking Any Comments/Criticism Will Be Appreciated.

Enezdez

 

[Derrel]

I realllllllly do not want to sound overly negative on this photo, and it has some good things going on, but I'll say with candor that I do not like the lighting effect for this person. I think the main light is too high up and too close to her, and is causing a very heavy under-nose shadow that's indicative of a lighting scheme that's not ideal, for her, in this pose. She seems to have dark eyeballs,and the main light's position emphasizes the under-eye lines that she naturally has, and is causing a fairly unflattering lighting effect on her mouth and teeth. I can live with the eyeball darkness, and the under-eye lines, but the teeth thing really bothers me because it's crating a ghoulish-type look. I'm not a fan of horizontal 3:2 ratio frames on standing people, and the horizontal camera has created an inelegant crop on the arms and wrists; this really cried out for a tall camera orientation. The best thing about this is the nice tonal range, and the way the velvety and satiny blouse is rendered, and how nicely lit her hair is.

 

[enezdez13 4]

I realllllllly do not want to sound overly negative on this photo, and it has some good things going on, but I'll say with candor that I do not like the lighting effect for this person. I think the main light is too high up and too close to her, and is causing a very heavy under-nose shadow that's indicative of a lighting scheme that's not ideal, for her, in this pose. She seems to have dark eyeballs,and the main light's position emphasizes the under-eye lines that she naturally has, and is causing a fairly unflattering lighting effect on her mouth and teeth. I can live with the eyeball darkness, and the under-eye lines, but the teeth thing really bothers me because it's crating a ghoulish-type look. I'm not a fan of horizontal 3:2 ratio frames on standing people, and the horizontal camera has created an inelegant crop on the arms and wrists; this really cried out for a tall camera orientation. The best thing about this is the nice tonal range, and the way the velvety and satiny blouse is rendered, and how nicely lit her hair is.

I agree with you...Unfortunately, I don't control the lighting at the workshop & from my other shots with other models I found the lighting even less flattering, this was the best one...Since it was my first time going maybe I was to timid & should of requested to move the light in a manner I wanted (dunno, if they would accommodate). Thank You @Derrel for your candor & your "eye," I really appreciate it!!!

Cheers,

Enezdez

 

[smoke665]

The first question that comes to mind, is if this was a workshop, what was the purpose of the stations??? If you had no control of the lights (intensity/location) or of the model, what was the point of the shot, was it just to set your exposure??? Or, if this was the first visit, maybe they didn't fully explain the options available to you?? I'd see that as a serious failure on their part.

 

[Designer]

I went to a portrait workshop ..

I think you could go ahead and name the workshop. Or a link.

 

[tirediron]

So the light position wasn't ideal; sometimes that's a fact of life. Okay... sucks, but why not adjust the model? As Derrel said, the position of the key light is causing a less than desirable shadow line under her eyes, cheeks and nose, but if she tilted her head back a bit more, you might have been able to get something. A lot of times your ability to make lemonade out of the lemons you're handed is as important as the camera you bring.

 

[enezdez13 4]

So the light position wasn't ideal; sometimes that's a fact of life. Okay... sucks, but why not adjust the model? As Derrel said, the position of the key light is causing a less than desirable shadow line under her eyes, cheeks and nose, but if she tilted her head back a bit more, you might have been able to get something. A lot of times your ability to make lemonade out of the lemons you're handed is as important as the camera you bring.

I also felt pressured their were people behind me waiting to shoot, not like I am at home with my "girl-friend's dad" - it was a learning experience.. lol :-(

 

[tirediron]

Fair enough; all good learning experiences!

 

[Derrel]

So the light position wasn't ideal; sometimes that's a fact of life. Okay... sucks, but why not adjust the model? As Derrel said, the position of the key light is causing a less than desirable shadow line under her eyes, cheeks and nose, but if she tilted her head back a bit more, you might have been able to get something. A lot of times your ability to make lemonade out of the lemons you're handed is as important as the camera you bring.

This is what I was allluding to last night when I wrote, " ...a lighting scheme that's not ideal, for her, in this pose. She seems to have dark eyeballs,and the main light's position emphasizes the under-eye lines that she naturally has, and is causing a fairly unflattering lighting effect on her mouth and teeth"

When the main light is high and mostly overhead, having the model angle her face upwardly, can create some neat lighting effects. This is something you'll often find in places where there are overhead "can" lights (recessed into the ceiling), and they cast strong, straight-down shadows. Kitchens, stair wells, and office areas can have this type of strong, almost directly-overhead lighting in many buildings.

Same thing happens when shooting in strong, direct, outdoor sun-lighted conditions. You can _NOT_ adjust the main light, so you have to move the model around, in relation to the light. A few degrees of upward lift on the face can turn odd lighting into better lighting, just based on the source/subject angles.

I totally,totally "get" that this was one of those step-up-and-shoot scenarios, where you're kind of under time constraints,using somebody else's set-up and so on. Still...it does show off some neat technical stuff, like the D850's low-low ISO range and incredible resolving capability. I think perhaps if the teeth and that shadow on her gum line area were expertly lightened up, that this would make a much stronger picture. That shadow-y-ness on the teeth and gum line area, is for me at least, the main issue that detracts on this shot.

 

[enezdez13 4]

Thank you @Derrel for taking the time out of your busy day to explain & provide additional guidance!

 

[tirediron]

...Same thing happens when shooting in strong, direct, outdoor sun-lighted conditions. You can _NOT_ adjust the main light, ..

I'm pretty sure that Profoto makes a sun switch; you can turn it on, off or dim as required. (Cost $1,000,000,000,000,000.23)

 

[SquarePeg36 7]

I have the same question about the workshop. What was the main goal? Was it posing, lighting?

 

[Granddad]

Maybe it's a good experience to show that not all workshops are set up by people who really know what they're doing.

 

[enezdez13 4]

I have the same question about the workshop. What was the main goal? Was it posing, lighting?

Maybe it's a good experience to show that not all workshops are set up by people who really know what they're doing.

To be honest, I felt it was like a free-for-all - I originally went with the idea I was going to learn about lighting the subjects in this way or that way & light placement accordingly + how to use multiple lights eventually.... It appears to me all they really do is provide subjects (models), I was a little disappointed but I learn to make lemonade next time like both @tirediron & @Derrel suggested, I will give it another shot (no pun intended next month).

Happy Sunday & Cheers,

Enezdez