Tim and his Camel

[DevilDogge]

For the record i never progressed in photography until I joined another non-photography bases forum that had a photography section. The people there told me what sucked and what dumb **** i was doing and they were brutal. Needless to say my shots improved about 10 fold in the first year. I was right where you were bro.

Jimmy, it took you two insulting posts and however much time that goes into them, before you actually gave some constructive critique. If you're going to be a rude, insulting, little twerp, you may as well not even waste your time unless you're going to give thoughts and pointers to make the OP better. But again, it took you 2 posts to get to that point... I'm surprised the OP even bothered to come back to see what you said.

I'm not giving much critique, (but I do like the wide angle close-ups), I'm just responding to Jimmy, who is the exact reason why many forums fail, and why people don't want to share their hobby.

 

[Iron Flatline]

Oh well, too bad... I guess I would have made him a compliment, told him I like the shot, and how it reminds me of my friend's work. Ali has won a number of fine art prizes, done a lot of fashion work (Vogue, Harpers) and also album covers (Fisherspooner) but I guess Joey's out of here, and we're all ****.

I prefer it when people give as much as they get from a community...

Oh, and for what it's worth... a lot of people here are very focused on the technical aspects of photography. Try and create a cohesive body of work. An image is important, a vision is something entirely different. There is a difference between accurately capturing something for documentation, and then there is story telling.

I'll go back to being **** now.

 

[bazooka]

It took me a while to view this thread because the title didn't sound interesting. :lmao: But I do like the shot. I agree that the cheek looks odd (smoke as someone pointed out)... but I like the DOF and the lighting that falls off toward the feet.

 

[SrBiscuit]

the smoke looks like a piece of packing tape stuck to his cheek at first glance.

funny you say that...that's EXACTLY what i saw.

 

[just x joey]

Thanks for the constructive responses everyone. I may continue to post my work. it's good to see there are people who really are all about building up the photog community. For the record, I do not expect people to say how great my photos are. I can show my grandma and get all the praises I need. I post here to get constructive criticism. it's okay to tear apart my photos technically, just make sure you let me know what I should shoot for next time. I am going through the thread now to thank each person who contributed to this forum post.


I didn't notice the smoke until i had put the picture on my computer or i would have taken another shot. The forehead is blow out because i was too close i guess? I tried bumping the flash off the ceiling but i guess it may have bumped off the wall next to his forehead. Again, thanks for the constructive remarks.

 

[just x joey]

You want a constructive advice?

Tell him to quit smoking.

haha, he actually doesn't. I just got my camera and he took the cig from a friend and said "yo, take a pic of me." lol.

 

[Derrel]

>SNIP>The forehead is blow out because i was too close i guess? I tried bumping the flash off the ceiling but i guess it may have bumped off the wall next to his forehead. Again, thanks for the constructive remarks.

Actually, this is a good post to point out why some of the new "Strobist" gear is so useful, like the Honl stuff and the DIY stuff made of foam craft material available at hobby stores; the reason the forehead is blown out is that when you are shooting in small spaces like this (garage I assume, with probably 7 to 8 foot ceiling height) and doing bounced flash, at close ranges there will be "some" light that leaves the flash's fresnel lens front and goes straight at the subject, causing a slightly specular lighting effect.

The only way to get rid of this is to shield the light coming from the flash with some kind of blocker device--one that prevents ANY of the light from leaving the front of the flash and going straight to the subject. In really close quarters, this little bit of light with a highlight and a shadow of its own can ruin shot after shot, and at just the right angle, there can be a surprising amount of light coming from the entire "face area" of the flash. On a flash like the Sunpak 622 Super, a big handle-mount, it is often necessary to block or shroud the face of the flash because it is so huge; the front panel of the flash can, in effect, act as A DISTINCT SOURCE OF LIGHT because it is very bright, and the main body of the flash burst is sent out as a bounce and diffused. Soooooo, what happens is a slightly specular reflection, especially on foreheads or eyeglasses, paired up with a soft, diffused bounce flash look. That ruins many photos.

What you need to do in lighting parlance, is to "flag off" the speedlight.

 

[kundalini]

^^ I like the Honl stuff.


Certain flash heads can rotate backwards. This is an effective way to bounce it tight quarters.

 

[just x joey]

>SNIP>The forehead is blow out because i was too close i guess? I tried bumping the flash off the ceiling but i guess it may have bumped off the wall next to his forehead. Again, thanks for the constructive remarks.

Actually, this is a good post to point out why some of the new "Strobist" gear is so useful, like the Honl stuff and the DIY stuff made of foam craft material available at hobby stores; the reason the forehead is blown out is that when you are shooting in small spaces like this (garage I assume, with probably 7 to 8 foot ceiling height) and doing bounced flash, at close ranges there will be "some" light that leaves the flash's fresnel lens front and goes straight at the subject, causing a slightly specular lighting effect.

The only way to get rid of this is to shield the light coming from the flash with some kind of blocker device--one that prevents ANY of the light from leaving the front of the flash and going straight to the subject. In really close quarters, this little bit of light with a highlight and a shadow of its own can ruin shot after shot, and at just the right angle, there can be a surprising amount of light coming from the entire "face area" of the flash. On a flash like the Sunpak 622 Super, a big handle-mount, it is often necessary to block or shroud the face of the flash because it is so huge; the front panel of the flash can, in effect, act as A DISTINCT SOURCE OF LIGHT because it is very bright, and the main body of the flash burst is sent out as a bounce and diffused. Soooooo, what happens is a slightly specular reflection, especially on foreheads or eyeglasses, paired up with a soft, diffused bounce flash look. That ruins many photos.

What you need to do in lighting parlance, is to "flag off" the speedlight.

^^ I like the Honl stuff.


Certain flash heads can rotate backwards. This is an effective way to bounce it tight quarters.

I have the sb600, and can tilt it backwards, thanks for the tip! Also, would a playing card work as a flash "blocker"? I could easily rubber-band one on.


EDIT: Googled the honl products. Man they look sweet. I'm going to pick up the set next pay check .

 

[Derrel]

Yes, a playing card can work as a flash blocker. In places like garages it might not always be possible to tilt the flash backwards. The problem I am describing is worst when shooting "talls" in an indoor location where you need to turn the flash slightly forward, so that the bounced light goes between the flash and your subject.

I didn't mention tilting the flash backwards, because in your situation, in a place like a garage, tilting the flash backwards will mean that YOU and your body will block the majority of the light from hitting the subject. It's easier just to flag the flash. I can tell it's a low-ceiling room also by the way the light is hot on his forehead,and falls off VERY rapidly; the Inverse Square Law is a huge problem shooting in a garage studio.

A slightly larger flag, like a 3x5 index card, has been a standard for decades. There's also a nice video tutorial I linked to a few weeks ago called "A Better Bounce Card", and it will show you how to make a 2-minute foam Better Bounce Card, which is basically a "flag" when oriented one way,and a bounce card when oriented the other way.[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNCmuExlHvM[/ame]

 

[just x joey]

Yes, a playing card can work as a flash blocker. In places like garages it might not always be possible to tilt the flash backwards. The problem I am describing is worst when shooting "talls" in an indoor location where you need to turn the flash slightly forward, so that the bounced light goes between the flash and your subject.

I didn't mention tilting the flash backwards, because in your situation, in a place like a garage, tilting the flash backwards will mean that YOU and your body will block the majority of the light from hitting the subject. It's easier just to flag the flash. I can tell it's a low-ceiling room also by the way the light is hot on his forehead,and falls off VERY rapidly; the Inverse Square Law is a huge problem shooting in a garage studio.

A slightly larger flag, like a 3x5 index card, has been a standard for decades. There's also a nice video tutorial I linked to a few weeks ago called "A Better Bounce Card", and it will show you how to make a 2-minute foam Better Bounce Card, which is basically a "flag" when oriented one way,and a bounce card when oriented the other way.YouTube - A Better Bounce Card for your camera - Peter Gregg

Thank you for your time and your well thought-out posts. You're the man! :hugs:

 

[jackieclayton]

I like it... i'd say the wb is off because his forehead looks blownout and pale, but I see this tone quite frequently photographs taken in mens advertisements... open up any Mens Health magazine and not only are the editorial photos this kind of look and color but also the advertisements. i like the angle too, taking a portrait at a wide angle is risky but it worked! good job!

Smoking is bad... mmmmkay? lol