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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Is that professional??
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 28, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/19/2006 05:34:04 PM · #1
//eydisinga.bloggar.is/myndir/2658/11084/44b39e3bd9cc7.jpg

ok woulde you look at this for me! This is my friend and her boyfriend when she gratuaded.. ok tell me you think the lighting is off here! I mean you go to and pay a professional and you get harsh shaddows.. what's that about? Or is this just my personal view? Are those shaddows maybe just real nicely done? Am not so good at lighting

Message edited by author 2006-07-19 17:34:13.
07/19/2006 05:35:46 PM · #2
Originally posted by Krisby:

//eydisinga.bloggar.is/myndir/2658/11084/44b39e3bd9cc7.jpg
07/19/2006 05:36:53 PM · #3
looks like it was done on purpose...
I rather like the shot actually ... looks like a euro magizine ad

Message edited by author 2006-07-19 17:42:30.
07/19/2006 05:38:38 PM · #4
I think the photographer needs to work on his/her lighting a little bit, but 'harsh shadow'? What is needed is light on the backdrop and pull the couple away from the backdrop... His dark suit needs to contrast with the backdrop in other words.
07/19/2006 05:42:52 PM · #5
I like the shot...it does have the feel of a magazine ad. If you had studio lighting I'm sure it would have been better but for a shot on the go it looks very good.
07/19/2006 05:45:49 PM · #6
The goal of a portrait isn't always "no shadows", but in this case I agree with Eugene. The subjects are too close to the backdrop and there should be a light behind them for separation. But then again --- remember -- there are different levels of "professional" and well, you get what you pay for.
07/19/2006 05:46:26 PM · #7
Those shadows are actually pretty soft and add a bit of depth.
What I don't like about it is the flat tone of the photo.
07/19/2006 05:49:13 PM · #8
Originally posted by idnic:

... but in this case I agree with Eugene.

You say that like we never agree or I'm never right. :D
07/19/2006 05:49:54 PM · #9
Originally posted by _eug:

Originally posted by idnic:

... but in this case I agree with Eugene.

You say that like we never agree or I'm never right. :D


heheee yeah, surprised me too :P
07/19/2006 05:51:04 PM · #10
seems like it's just the photographer's style to me too.
07/19/2006 05:51:36 PM · #11
Originally posted by idnic:

The goal of a portrait isn't always "no shadows", but in this case I agree with Eugene. The subjects are too close to the backdrop and there should be a light behind them for separation. But then again --- remember -- there are different levels of "professional" and well, you get what you pay for.


I'll agree with you... so I won't have to say I agree with Eug :-)
07/19/2006 05:51:40 PM · #12
Originally posted by idnic:

The goal of a portrait isn't always "no shadows", but in this case I agree with Eugene. The subjects are too close to the backdrop and there should be a light behind them for separation. But then again --- remember -- there are different levels of "professional" and well, you get what you pay for.


Hey Cindi... I am going to give the maker the benefit of the doubt on this one ... the shadows may be a "style" thing... I am not crazy about the post ... but I think that it is still "acceptable"
07/19/2006 05:52:07 PM · #13
the thing im getting to here is that i feel it looks like I of all people coulde have taken this in my living room with a tablelamp a lightsource! not like it is taken with probackground..

Message edited by author 2006-07-19 17:52:41.
07/19/2006 05:53:12 PM · #14
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by idnic:

The goal of a portrait isn't always "no shadows", but in this case I agree with Eugene. The subjects are too close to the backdrop and there should be a light behind them for separation. But then again --- remember -- there are different levels of "professional" and well, you get what you pay for.

I'll agree with you... so I won't have to say I agree with Eug :-)

Damn, you too? My fan club became my peanut gallery.
07/19/2006 05:54:09 PM · #15
Originally posted by Krisby:

the thing im getting to here is that i feel it looks like I of all people coulde have taken this in my living room with a tablelamp a lightsource! not like it is taken with probackground..


Almost. What gets me about it is that she is considerably better lit than the male model. Even if we were going to leave the shadows on the BG for a style choice, I'd like to see even lighting across the models.
07/19/2006 05:55:03 PM · #16
Originally posted by nomad469:

Originally posted by idnic:

The goal of a portrait isn't always "no shadows", but in this case I agree with Eugene. The subjects are too close to the backdrop and there should be a light behind them for separation. But then again --- remember -- there are different levels of "professional" and well, you get what you pay for.


Hey Cindi... I am going to give the maker the benefit of the doubt on this one ... the shadows may be a "style" thing... I am not crazy about the post ... but I think that it is still "acceptable"


So true, might be the photographers' style. Therein lies the other issue though - customers and photographers should communicate BEFORE the shoot and discuss what it is they want or expect and AFTER the shoot speak up if they are not happy. Also they should look at other examples of the photographers work so they know what they can expect for the money.
07/19/2006 05:57:08 PM · #17
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by Krisby:

the thing im getting to here is that i feel it looks like I of all people coulde have taken this in my living room with a tablelamp a lightsource! not like it is taken with probackground..

Almost. What gets me about it is that she is considerably better lit than the male model. Even if we were going to leave the shadows on the BG for a style choice, I'd like to see even lighting across the models.

The alternative being to have them switch places. Her outfit would contrast better with the shadows and also reflect more of the light than he currently does. Since he'd be closer to the light, his dark suit would contrast with the lit part of the wall better.
07/19/2006 05:58:15 PM · #18
Originally posted by idnic:

Originally posted by nomad469:

Originally posted by idnic:

The goal of a portrait isn't always "no shadows", but in this case I agree with Eugene. The subjects are too close to the backdrop and there should be a light behind them for separation. But then again --- remember -- there are different levels of "professional" and well, you get what you pay for.


Hey Cindi... I am going to give the maker the benefit of the doubt on this one ... the shadows may be a "style" thing... I am not crazy about the post ... but I think that it is still "acceptable"


So true, might be the photographers' style. Therein lies the other issue though - customers and photographers should communicate BEFORE the shoot and discuss what it is they want or expect and AFTER the shoot speak up if they are not happy. Also they should look at other examples of the photographers work so they know what they can expect for the money.


yep yep yep ... right on the money
My customers KNOW they are going to get "unusual" thats what they want ...
07/19/2006 05:59:39 PM · #19
Originally posted by _eug:


The alternative being to have them switch places. Her outfit would contrast better with the shadows and also reflect more of the light than he currently does. Since he'd be closer to the light, his dark suit would contrast with the lit part of the wall better.

that would work!
07/19/2006 06:00:48 PM · #20
Originally posted by _eug:


The alternative being to have them switch places. Her outfit would contrast better with the shadows and also reflect more of the light than he currently does. Since he'd be closer to the light, his dark suit would contrast with the lit part of the wall better.


That works too :-)
07/19/2006 06:04:03 PM · #21
Originally posted by nomad469:


yep yep yep ... right on the money
My customers KNOW they are going to get "unusual" thats what they want ...


Hmmm... a lot of mine expect to get nekkid... :-)
07/19/2006 06:04:57 PM · #22

07/19/2006 06:05:11 PM · #23
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by nomad469:


yep yep yep ... right on the money
My customers KNOW they are going to get "unusual" thats what they want ...


Hmmm... a lot of mine expect to get nekkid... :-)


send me a few of those will ya... !
07/19/2006 06:07:12 PM · #24
Originally posted by nomad469:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by nomad469:


yep yep yep ... right on the money
My customers KNOW they are going to get "unusual" thats what they want ...

Hmmm... a lot of mine expect to get nekkid... :-)

send me a few of those will ya... !

He guards his sources with his life. ;)
07/19/2006 06:07:58 PM · #25
Mine just expect everything and the moon - for free! "I know I've gained 254 pounds this year, but you can do that Photoshop stuff to make me look like I did last year, right?"
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 10:28:35 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 10:28:35 PM EDT.