| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/31/2006 10:05:57 AM · #1 |
I've been away from the contests and forums for a while, trying to actually spend some time building my photography business. I did my first Senior portrait shoot yesterday and would love some feedback on the results. The link to the photos is here: Senior Portraits
Thanks in advance for the feedback.
Bob |
|
|
|
12/31/2006 10:21:27 AM · #2 |
I really like your proofs. Very professional! The only comment I have is that the placement of your 'proof' mark is overpowering in some of the photos where it covers the subjects mouth and nose. The proof is intended to prevent someone from attempting to copy your proofs but not to mask the subject itself. I would suggest slightly different placement or to create a watermark proof that would allow some transparency.
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 10:26:09 AM · #3 |
| I noticed that you're using the full size of your sensor (i.e. with an aspect ratio of 2:3). It's very hard to find a frame for that size, as most frames are in the 8x10 aspect ratio. You might want to consider that as you sell your photos. |
|
|
|
12/31/2006 10:29:18 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by keone:
I really like your proofs. Very professional! The only comment I have is that the placement of your 'proof' mark is overpowering in some of the photos where it covers the subjects mouth and nose. The proof is intended to prevent someone from attempting to copy your proofs but not to mask the subject itself. I would suggest slightly different placement or to create a watermark proof that would allow some transparency. |
Unfortunetly the service that I use for online proofs/purchases places the proof mark on the print automatically, and I can't change it. |
|
|
|
12/31/2006 10:32:09 AM · #5 |
I liked the slideshow. And loved some of the collages you put together (like full body shot combined with a headshot).
There were a few images where I would have liked to have stopped the show and looked more carefully at the image. The buy button lets me stop the show and pick an image out of it... but then all I have are tiny thumbnails to look at. As a buyer, I'd have a hard time deciding based solely on the slideshow and thumbnails... so hopefully you have something else in place to allow her to look more carefully at the images one at a time.
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 10:37:13 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by jrdawson:
I noticed that you're using the full size of your sensor (i.e. with an aspect ratio of 2:3). It's very hard to find a frame for that size, as most frames are in the 8x10 aspect ratio. You might want to consider that as you sell your photos. |
I fall into this trap a lot! I naturally want to fill the frame, like with a large/wide group, or with a bride and her long dress. Then when the customer wants to buy the picture, they sometimes end up buying 8x12s instead of 8x10s, or 12x18s, or 16x24s. Luckily for anything of the latter size, the customer usually buys a custom made frame anyway, so it's not too big a deal (and 8x12" frames aren't too hard to find).
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 11:39:26 AM · #7 |
You have a pretty girl for you first senior, you have good focus and some good poses. Your lighting is flat though.
Notice you have no shadows on the face and that your catchlights are almost center in her eyes. Although it's more of a personal preference, I feel one catch light is better than two. And rule of thumb is to try and get the catchlight in the 2 or 11 o'clock position of the eyes (depending on which side your main light is on).
For shadows, again, rule of thumb is to have a nose shadow that is anywhere from half way between the nose and upper lip and just touching the upper lip. It is shadows that give a 2D image the appearance of depth to it and for straight portraits like this, are created with light placement and lighting ratio between main and fill lights.
You pictures aren't bad... and the things I pointed out probably won't even be obvious to a non-photographic person, but lighting is something that can change a "not bad" image into a "WOW!" image and get you more sells and happy customers.
Mike
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 11:44:44 AM · #8 |
Hated the Flash loading time, Hated the Music, Hated the proof.
Other than that.. They look like senior portraits...
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 11:51:55 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by MikeJ:
You have a pretty girl for you first senior, you have good focus and some good poses. Your lighting is flat though.
|
I noticed the flat lighting also. It screams "Glamor Shots TM" to me. Very typical to flat light portraits at retail studios, although it's not the best way to do it, it is the safest.
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 12:29:47 PM · #10 |
Happy new year Bob...
It's to bad about this "PROOF" message that the model has right across her face...
Nothing wrong with the protection but choose another type face almost invisible but yet it protect your work...
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 12:29:59 PM · #11 |
Happy new year Bob...
It's to bad about this "PROOF" message that the model has right across her face...
Nothing wrong with the protection but choose another type face almost invisible but yet it protect your work...
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 03:04:49 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Simpa:
Happy new year Bob...
It's to bad about this "PROOF" message that the model has right across her face...
Nothing wrong with the protection but choose another type face almost invisible but yet it protect your work... |
I really like your proofs. Very professional! The only comment I have is that the placement of your 'proof' mark is overpowering in some of the photos where it covers the subjects mouth and nose. The proof is intended to prevent someone from attempting to copy your proofs but not to mask the subject itself. I would suggest slightly different placement or to create a watermark proof that would allow some transparency.
Unfortunetly the service that I use for online proofs/purchases places the proof mark on the print automatically, and I can't change it
Same as above - cant change the typeface - wish I could. |
|
|
|
12/31/2006 04:21:37 PM · #13 |
i like the proofs....how many students were there? Must have been a long day
I echo what everyone else is saying about the "proof" protection across the middle |
|
|
|
12/31/2006 04:43:23 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by obsaysditto:
i like the proofs....how many students were there? Must have been a long day
I echo what everyone else is saying about the "proof" protection across the middle |
Only one student this time, time wasn't that long, 20 minute setup in the students house and then about 65 minutes of shooting. Can't do anything about the 'proof' setting because of the service that I am using, either I turn it on, or off, no choice for placement or type face. Thanks for everyones comments. |
|
|
|
12/31/2006 05:25:05 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
Originally posted by obsaysditto:
i like the proofs....how many students were there? Must have been a long day
I echo what everyone else is saying about the "proof" protection across the middle |
Only one student this time, time wasn't that long, 20 minute setup in the students house and then about 65 minutes of shooting. Can't do anything about the 'proof' setting because of the service that I am using, either I turn it on, or off, no choice for placement or type face. Thanks for everyones comments. |
I say get rid of it. If they want to print screen at that size, they are going to get a cruddy image anyway.
may perhaps you might look for a differnt service. Click my signature link below, and it will take you to my photoreflect account. It seems to work rather well.
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 05:31:54 PM · #16 |
I wouldn't get rid of it. Some of you might be very surprised at how well even low resolution images do print off and just how bad prints some people will accept to be able to get them free. The watermark servers the purpose of being able to protect the image from easy printing (and there are those that will take it that way anyway) but will let the senior and her family see the images.
What you could do if you wanted to show some of the best ones for people on here to see, is put them somewhere else or in your portfolio and display those on here without the watermark.
If you want to turn this into a business, you will need to worry about clients getting copies of your work without having to pay for it. Some will do that without a hesitation. Others will buy some and then copy those. All you can do is protect yourself as best as you can and the watermark helps.
Mike
|
|
|
|
12/31/2006 05:40:51 PM · #17 |
| I'm going to stick with the watermark for now, I've been selling quite a few sports photos without any complaints from customers so far. Also the senior shots that I'm doing are in my local area, so if any of those customers want to see the images in person, I come to them with my laptop and they see them full screen. Thanks again for all of the great feedback, some great ideas - especially about the flat lighting, I'll definetly have to work on that, I guess it will get better with practice and more experience. |
|
|
|
12/31/2006 07:03:17 PM · #18 |
I don't recommend web proofing, and the music is soooo uncool (sorry, but if the kids think you're uncool or not hip they won't line up to give you their money)
Best deal is projection proofing using a projector and preferrably proselect software. My average sale for seniors went from 275ish to just under 800 with this move alone.
i don't like the PROOF across the middle, but you gotta do what you gotta do. Breezebrowser Pro is $70 and does a nice job IMO, than what I see here, and it works we well or better without being so intrusive.
I'm commenting as I watch the slides, and it's a lot easier to see the flaws after the images are made than to see them at the time (I've learned this the hard way). But this is how one learns.
As to the images themeselves...in some of the poses you have her very square to the camera (her face). In most the lighting is very flat - walmat et al can do flat lighting, you should do better if you want to charge more than they do. Some of the images there are multiple catchlights in the eyes - there should only be one, and optimally in the lower quadrant of the eye (that part's hard I know, and not done very often at all, but I just pass it along as info to be digested)
YOu need to have her turn her head more, and in some shots tilt it - sideways, and you should be higher up - i see her nostrils. #23 is better in some of these respects, but I can still see up her nose. The high-key full shot on the stool - her white shirt by her belt line in teh back is blown out and blends into the BG.
Her standing shots - in the boots on the white BG - yuk. She needs to turn a bit more toward the camera, move her arms to show her waist and female shape, and then bend the front knee and put her wait on the leg away from the camera. Major rule of posing - if it bends, bend it. if there are two of them (eyes, ears, hands, etc) then the need to be at different levels.
The outside shots...dead trees growing out of her head...please no. perhaps at f2 or something it might work.
her standing next to the tree - the shadow on the tree of her is terrible IMO. There is the beginning of modeling on her face in some of the shots, but teh on-camera fill is too strong. If you'd have moved her around the tree to the other side (and kept the multi trunk white tree out of the BG as it's very distracting) and used the natural light and the tree to model her face it would have been much nicer - use the tree to feather the light like you can in a studio. If you don't know about feathering light it's a must know for portraiture and studio work.
More outdoor shots...WATCH THE BACKGROUND! The neighbor's houses and chain link fence? You've got to be kidding, right? Also, less DOF outdoors - try a 70-200 2.8 lens at 2.8, and on a tripod unless you have IS.
#43 is for her passport or driver's license? Please, I'm not being mean or anything, but that's what it reminds me of.
43 and on - the BG is off color and a different color in most every shot - greenish, pinkish, yellowish. YOu need to use custom WB on studio work unless, and only unless, you have identical high end strobes. Cheap strobes (udner perhaps $2000 / flash) will not be consistent on color from unit to unit, as they age and as flash duration varies, and the modifiers will all impart a slight color shift as well, especially aging cheap softboxes (they yellow). go to photovisionvideo.com and spend the $60 to get a 24" target and then shoot RAW and custom WB afterwards - it makes a HUGE improvement in the images - i got one part way thru my fall pet/santa bit and wow - it give the images the 'pop' you want with one-click for WB, and it comes with a DVD that will make it easy for you to get perfect exposures - and that helps make better images and faster workflow too.
Images 56 and 57 - 57 looks good, 56 is underexposed. see the BG and her skin tone.
One thing I noticed early on but waited till the end to comment on - you need more variety - i see the typical head shot or head/bust, and some full length. there are 2 or 3 shots of the 58 that are something else. You need close up in your face shots, head shots, 3/4 and full. Of each out fit. You need more than one expression. Yeah, her eyes looked camera left in one shot, but everything else is one expression, all looking directly at the camera. Nothing candid, nothing fun or serious or silly. All that nice long hair (at times it needs position better or just combed) and you did nothing with it.
If you want to succeed at shooting seniors you need to take a few classes - even a 1 day seminar. It will open your mind to the possibilities!
Check for these speakers - ralph romaguera, kia bondurant and sana antisdel (active in //www.spartists.com/event_speakers.html), Vicki Tauffer (V Gallery), Jen Hillenga to name a few. Most of them AVERAGE OVER $2000 per senior in sales. Except ralph, but he runs 3 studios and does nearly $2 million in sales a year, so he a slightly different approach - higher volume at a slightly lower average. google the names and you'll find a few things you may find helpful.
One more comment - and unless you've seen what the above folks are shooting, showing and selling you may not know any different, but the shots you have there are a lot like what my mother had done 50 years ago - expect for the hair style and clothing, and now their in color. Kids these days, as the cliche goes, are NOT the same as they used to be. They have more images thrown at them in a day on TV than you probably do in 6 months - they have videos, MTV, tv shows and the magazines, the ads the stores they shop in- what they see in those images is what they want to see in THEIR images.
Shots like these i took right before christmas - these two were tehir favorites, especially the B&W one. And yes, the trees are dead here too.
Message edited by author 2007-01-01 21:25:11.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 12:41:52 PM EDT.
