Fashion Shoot - Comments Welcome

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

07/03/2003 06:24:24 PM · #1

Last Sunday I was lucky enough to get photograph a friend and model whom I met thtough the internet.

It was our third shoot together. But this was the first time I have ever attempted to do a 'formal' shoot outdoors. For the shoot, I chose the Jefferson Memorial, a favorite location of mine, in Washington DC, at sunset. There were loads of tourists swarming, and gawking but Christina was confident enough to remain focused. Occasionally it made it hard to get some good scene shots because there were random people in the shot, often, so instead i did more intimate, closer portraits.

There are also a couple shots in there that we did in the 'studio'.

X-tina Gallery

I'm going to attempt to sell some of these to Washintonian and maybe some other travel magazines :). Comments and constructive feedback welcome.

kiwiness

Canon Canon 1d x Mark II

07/03/2003 06:38:02 PM · #2

Wicked shots Mag!!! You haven't lost your touch, you just get better and better. I envy you.... Wonderful pics!

bod

07/03/2003 07:04:49 PM · #3

What Kiwi said!
The studio shots I'm not over excited about, but the outdoor stuff is really good.

3 & 4 are not quite there for me - 3 her face seems grainy or something, 4 is maybe a tad too soft.
5 - 10 are all excellent, 6 & 7 especially. 7 would be my favourite but is missing one essential ingredient ... Bling!!! ; )

greenem2

Canon EOS-10D

07/03/2003 07:58:15 PM · #4

Excellent shots! Is there anyway I could see the exif data or the basic settings/lenses used? I'm curious, as I'm still learning the 10D.

Alecia

Canon EOS-10D

07/03/2003 08:12:22 PM · #5

Originally posted by greenem2:

Excellent shots! Is there anyway I could see the exif data or the basic settings/lenses used? I'm curious, as I'm still learning the 10D.

ditto what greenem said--i need to learn this monster as well! :)

by the way--my new favorite of the bunch is 8--wow! very audrey hepburn, very wonderfully moody and perfect.
you rock maggio.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

07/03/2003 09:48:08 PM · #6

thanks for the encouragement guys! it was pretty challenging as the light got low and the tourists got starey -- some of them were a bit more blurred/soft than i would have normally gone for but i decided to just play that aspect up and enhance it with diffusion.

lens-wise, i just kept it simple. i have a very cheap canon ef 28-105 USM that i got to 'try the camera', when i wasnt sure if i wanted to stay canon or not. it's not even a USA model! it does ok, though. in fact, i find technique seems to outweigh any effects innate to the lens itself. nonetheless i would like to get a higher quality lens in this range, if at least for the a larger max aperture. this one is a 4.0-5.6. a 2.8 or lower would really rule in this kind of dusk setting!

i was shooting around sunset and then dusk. as it got darker and darker my shutter speed slowed and i lost quite a few shoots to cam movement or subject movement. i started at iso 200 and eventually raised it as high as 800 - which i prefer not to do , as 800 can be more noisey than i like. strangely, the last and duskiest shot - the one on the bridge with the lights behind (#4), i had inexplicably lowered the iso to 200 again. Not really sure why... but that explains why it's so soft/blurry.

anyway, thanks for the comments. and kiwi, i didnt know i'd *lost* my touch - but glad to see I haven't ! :)

Message edited by author 2003-07-03 22:05:23.

wewillexplore

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

07/03/2003 10:00:19 PM · #7

Rockin shots, Mag. :)

M

Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM

07/04/2003 09:06:09 AM · #8

i could have used you here to help me hold the bounce!

Originally posted by mavrik:

Rockin shots, Mag. :)

M

boyte1

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

07/04/2003 09:29:41 AM · #9

Hey Mag, I like 3 best but might I suggest a slight smile on your model. I mean if your going to try to sell these to tourist mags, shouldnt the model be happy to be there? Im not talking cheesing here , just a tiny curve of her lips. Thats just my thoughts. Great work as always.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

07/04/2003 11:02:31 AM · #10

thanks boyte!

added 4 more if any are interested ........

my fave is this one - click to see the enlarged version:

wewillexplore

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

07/04/2003 11:17:44 AM · #11

Originally posted by magnetic9999:

i could have used you here to help me hold the bounce!

Originally posted by mavrik:
Rockin shots, Mag. :)

M

Would've LOVED to! I could learn so much holding the bounce. ;)

M

kiwiness

Canon Canon 1d x Mark II

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

07/04/2003 08:07:13 PM · #12

Originally posted by mavrik:

Originally posted by magnetic9999:
i could have used you here to help me hold the bounce!

Originally posted by mavrik:
Rockin shots, Mag. :)

M

Would've LOVED to! I could learn so much holding the bounce. ;)

M

Mav you'd only drool all over the bounce!

wewillexplore

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

07/04/2003 11:06:34 PM · #13

Pot, this is kettle, come in pot.....

M

Message edited by author 2003-07-04 23:30:32.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

07/05/2003 12:18:58 AM · #14

um ... suddenly i'm not sure if we're all thinking of the same meaning of 'hold the bounce' .....

:)

SharQ

Canon EOS-30D

07/05/2003 03:54:57 AM · #15

Originally posted by magnetic9999:

Last Sunday I was lucky enough to get photograph a friend and model whom I met thtough the internet.

Finally something I actually know something about (I work as a fashion photographer for several magazines. Unfortunately, my contract doesn't allow me to post the pictures on my website or on any other website, so I have little to show for it, but here goes)

Your pictures are good. Perhaps even very good. But they are not fashion shots as such - more lifestyle shots. In fashion, you will want to show the clothing - which means that you are restricted to shooting in colour, most of the time.

Another vital key point is sharpness. If an image isn't 100% pin-sharp, it won't get used by the magazine. But - and this is the interesting part - they will also want the background - or even items just a little further back in the image - out of focus, if you are shooting on location. Which means shooting at 2.8 or 1.8, and NOT (let me repeat that) NOT trust the autofocus on your camera. You have heard of auto exposure bracketing, yes? Get used to focus bracketing. FOcus a little short of what you think you need, then spot-on, then a little behind (i am talking about turning the focusring a millimeter each way).

Obviously, shooting on 2.8 requires extremely good lenses, as most lenses aren't at their sharpest at 2.8 at all. You might want to shoot at 5.6 or f/8 instead, which works great in the studio.

As for your images...

1) great contact with the model, good look, well seen. the lighting is great, but your image lacks sharpness and should probably have been in colour

2) The pants have lost their texture completely. Great for portrait shots, but in this case, it turns one of your best images into something that unfortunately is next to useless: In fashion it is about the fabrics of what you are taking pictures of first, then about the models.

3) Excellent seen, cool angle, but lacking sharpness and colour. I do like the grain however.

4) Nice portrait. However, I assume this picture is about the accessories (nothing else is in the picture fully), and they are too hazy to make out properly.

5) NEARLY there - the eyes need to be in focus. That is what we are drawn to, but we lose some of it. You might be able to save this through creative use of USM

6) This shot, while not particularly flattering to the model for some reason, is one of the better ones. Lacking colour, but still excellent.

7) very nice as a lifestyle shot. Not sure about its use as a fashion shot, though.

8) focus

9) Skin tones aren't too natural (i think your white balance has been confused by the backdrop), but nothing some photoshopping cannot fix (variations is your friend: image - adjust - variations)

10) focus

11) If this was in picture, this had been of publishable quality. I would have had no qualms putting this in any of the mags I work for.

12) See num 11. Great work

13) This is another great one. great focus, cool look and interesting pose. Well done!

14) Cool, but looks like an amateur snapshot taken on holiday - especially the model's pose. Sorry ;)

... I know, somewhat harsh. But the mags tend to use pictures that are technically flawless, rather than pictures where the models look their best - in fashion (as I've already droned on for long enough), the only thing that's important is the clothes.

Now if you were taking pictures for a lifestyle magazine, or were doing a lifestyle shoot for a fashion publication, your choice to go monochrome would have been a lot easier to swallow, but the sharpness issues still apply.

Keep it up - you are doing fabulous. Some of the shots you took are world-class. Just get used to hiding your inferior work ;)

Haje

SharQ

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

07/05/2003 03:58:37 AM · #16

Originally posted by magnetic9999:

lens-wise, i just kept it simple. i have a very cheap canon ef 28-105 USM

I really wouldn't dog that lens - at a wider aperture setting (f8.0), it rivals quite a few of Canon's L-series of lenses. Sure, it isn't the brightest thing around, but it is BY FAR the best consumer-zoom Canon has.

If you want a REALLY good lens, get the 50/1.8 (or even the 50/1.4, if you have money to burn). Both of them are relatively cheap, and they are extremely sharp when stopped down to 5.6 - 8.0.

Also check out PhotoDo, who do complete reviews of the sharpness of lenses. As you can see, the Canon 28-105 isn't bad at all.

hj

SharQ

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

07/05/2003 04:03:21 AM · #17

And while we are at it - this gallery shows a fashion shoot I did some time in January. It is a combined fashion / lifestyle shoot, and all the pictures in the gallery were published in the mag.

This is almost half a year ago, and I see a pile of weaknesses in the images, but it does kind of give the idea of what my magazine wants. Of course, all mags have different editorial policies and ideas, so other mags might want other things.

Interestingly enough, I took these pictures right after my lens bag was stolen, so I only had my 28-105 to work with. Yes, the very same lens as has already been discussed in this thread.

HJ

Message edited by author 2003-07-05 04:04:36.