DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Few portrait outtakes
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 15 of 15, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 03/22/2004 11:55:26 PM · #1
Here are a few outtakes from the photoshoot we got in Sunday afternoon before the Portrait challenge began.






03/23/2004 08:01:29 AM · #2
Iwas hoping to get some comments but I think this had already gone off the front page.

-bump-
 03/23/2004 08:08:43 AM · #3
very nice, good expression, nice posing!
My only critique is the light in the second two seems to be
a little harsh. Try a diffuser in front of your flash, or if you did
maybe lower the power setting on the flash.
 03/23/2004 08:11:19 AM · #4
They are all good, but I think the first one is my favorite. Also, IMHO, the model shouldn't be centered in the 2nd one.
 03/23/2004 08:12:17 AM · #5
I like them all. With a slight preference for the first. and I liked your challenge entry as well.
 03/23/2004 08:38:56 AM · #6
The first one is definitely the better one. As stated above, the lighting on the others appears too harsh. Perhaps pointing the flash head the side a bit?
 03/23/2004 09:11:31 AM · #7
Originally posted by cbeller:
They are all good, but I think the first one is my favorite. Also, IMHO, the model shouldn't be centered in the 2nd one.


Chris,

Yeah, I think that would have helped that photo, too.
 03/23/2004 09:14:31 AM · #8
Originally posted by superdave_909:
very nice, good expression, nice posing!
My only critique is the light in the second two seems to be
a little harsh. Try a diffuser in front of your flash, or if you did
maybe lower the power setting on the flash.


SuperDave and K-Rob,
Yeah. I had been shooting with the 550 pointed up and my 80/20 pocket bouncer on the head so that I had the flash dialed up by a step or so. Then we moved location and I moved some distance away from the model, pointed the bare flash straight on the model and the photos turned out just a little worse for it. I wish now I had those shots back and that I'd taken the time to put the 80/20 back on top of the flash unit. I thought that since I was so far away it probably wouldn't have served well and we were running way over the time I had allotted for the shoot (wife was watching the baby and both of them had run out of steam at that point). All-in-all, I'm happy with the results, tho. Thanks for the comment.

Message edited by author 2004-03-23 09:15:04.
 03/23/2004 09:15:33 AM · #9
The first one has good, even lighting. The other two almost look like they were shot in the evening with most of the light coming from the flash. Not sure if you do this or not, but it would be worth dialing down your flash so that more of the light is ambient, or using reflectors to bring in some more natural lighting. I typically work with my flash set about -1.7 EV when it is just for fill (although I'm only using the E-TTL strobes rather than doing much real flash control).
 03/23/2004 10:47:52 AM · #10
//www.photosig.com/go/main

Currently, the featured critique at Photosig.
 03/23/2004 11:18:39 AM · #11
Originally posted by orussell:
//www.photosig.com/go/main

Currently, the featured critique at Photosig.


Yeah, and now I'm having to defend it against some morons who want to nitpick a couple of shadows. They just saw it on the front page this morning and jumped on a chance to make it about themselves. The original guy wanted to mark it as a "thumbs down" or negatively instead of just "needs more work". I don't mind disagreement but he was pretty vehement that it was totally unacceptable as any kind of portrait. Well, sure, disagree but I will defend my work. I think most people would be glad to either have a shot of themselves that was of this caliber or even be able to take shots that look as good. I'm not trying to be obnoxious (although I may be) but a man's gotta defend his own work when he's satisfied with it and so that's my current view.

;)
 03/23/2004 11:42:13 AM · #12
Kevin - I'm a little confused. You've mentioned a couple of times that you screwed up the flash settings and that you would do it differently if you had the chance again. The photosig discussion basically agrees with your own comments that the lighting is not the best. I realise it can be tough to accept critique of work that you have a strong emotional attachment to, but you seem to know the mistakes with these images. Best to chalk it up to experience and learn as much as you can about the differences in the light quality.

For example - the first image you showed in this thread, outdoors in what appears to be overcast, even light is massively better than the image on photosig. There is a huge difference in the quality of the lighting and it is very noticeable.

Message edited by author 2004-03-23 11:45:12.
 03/23/2004 12:57:42 PM · #13
Actually, Gordon, what I said was that there was some room for improvement in the photo. However, the original commentor that kicked off the whole discussion said
Originally posted by author:
this photo is "uninspired and uninterresting" but giving 1TD will end up with a lot of people kicking my ass, I guess. therefore (and only therefore) I'm giving it an undeserved 1TU. sad to see people with quite high ranks judging photo only by the subject and not taking closer look at the execution


Now while I'm all for constructive criticism I think that this photo is better than average (and I think it scored better than average here on DPC as well). I'd take a 1 or even a 2 out of a 3 if someone has constructive criticism. I never thought everyone should like a photo I produce. But to say that it
Originally posted by author:
hurt(s) the author because he may end up feeling this is a way to shot good photos. and it isn't

is just in poor taste.

EDIT:
OK, Gordon, I can see how it is a valid critique and that is what I wanted. I happen to disagree given the conditions in which the shot was originally taken but I can see valid points in that some edits could have been made to the work to create a better photo. I do think it was done in an aggressive manner and that to say that the critiquer would have scored this negatively (not just as a "needs work") entry but he was afraid of retribution by others online just seems to be engineered to engender strife rather than point out technical flaws or even just things that could have been done better. I got several comments in multiple forums and out of them all I found that to be egregious in its timing (occurred after the photo had started scoring enough to get noticed on teh front page) and its lack of scoring integrity. If anyone doesn't like the work I'm fine with that. If someone has something to show me I would truly like to find it out. I just didn't like what I perceived to be the attitude that so many people had found the work nice enough to make positive comments and then this person attacked one of the other voters because he happened to think it could have been "executed" better. Of course he neither was on-location when it was shot nor has he shared any of his portrait work to show me how to make an "inspiring" shot in natural sunlight. But you are right, I can see things I will do different in future photoshoots. Thanks for pointing out that.

Message edited by author 2004-03-23 13:10:30.
 03/23/2004 05:13:33 PM · #14
I think they are pretty good, but whole heartedly agree on the fill flash. 1-2 stops under main light should be the fill setting. Good job though and keep shooting. ;D
 03/23/2004 06:15:02 PM · #15
Kevin- I would have voted your first outtake a 9 or so vs. the 7 I gave your submission. I agree with the general comments others have noted, but just wanted add a couple of points. My impression of your submitted photo was that the lighting on the model was actually fine, but resulted in the background being so close in value that there's little dimension to the photo (DOF aside). It's a little hard to visually separate the model from the background. Compare that shot to the wonderful 3D effect of your first outtake.

Several others had noted that the color looks muted, and I see that you've posted an "Edited for Color" version that looks MUCH better, though perhaps a bit overdone in the skin tones. Given that this was an Advanced Editing challenge, had you corrected the color and blurred/darkened the background for more separation, you'd have likely made the top 5. Nice job!
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/30/2026 12:45:10 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/30/2026 12:45:10 PM EDT.