| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/16/2005 08:34:33 AM · #1 |
Comments are welcome.
all from this session:
 |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 08:52:16 AM · #2 |
The dof seems a little too shallow on some of them, what aperature do you shoot at? The B&W one is the best one, I think. Also, do you rent/own a studio, or is this at Martin's place?
Thanks for sharing. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 09:13:11 AM · #3 |
| I agree with hopper, the DOF looks to shallow to keep the eyes in focus. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 09:15:49 AM · #4 |
| Did you say this was for an album cover? What kind of music? I have to say I probably wouldn't see this on any CD I would want to buy, but that's just my taste in music. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 09:20:07 AM · #5 |
Top one's my favorite, the third one runs a close second.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2005 09:27:37 AM · #6 |
i love numbers 1 and 3.
i'd like to see a quick sketch of your lighting setup for #1 if you have a chance. :) |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 09:32:28 AM · #7 |
| I like 2,3 and 5...I really think the shallow DOF is quite effective, but thats just me I suppose. I love the drama/mystery of 2, the quirky sensuality of 3...and 5 has this sort of "victorian" aura/elegance about it that I seem to favor. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 10:27:46 AM · #8 |
Bee-u-t-full model but I'm not fond of any of these. In the close-ups her eyes are very obviously out of focus, but not out of focus enough to make it look like her mouth is the focal point. The lighting in the tops ones doesn't do it for me.
Nice studio, tho. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 11:04:40 AM · #9 |
Ok... The shallow dof, shallow dof is not always a bad thing as it serves to soften the rear elements and define distances...
The studio is not Martin's... it's our mutual working space (Martin also works from his home studio as well. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 11:15:55 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Gil P:
Ok... The shallow dof, shallow dof is not always a bad thing as it serves to soften the rear elements and define distances... |
Very well said..please scream this from a mountain top somewhere so that others may also hear this truth...not that they'll listen, but it's worth a try. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 11:22:48 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by rktdesign:
Originally posted by Gil P:
Ok... The shallow dof, shallow dof is not always a bad thing as it serves to soften the rear elements and define distances... |
Very well said..please scream this from a mountain top somewhere so that others may also hear this truth...not that they'll listen, but it's worth a try. |
many people confuse technique and intent. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 11:27:49 AM · #12 |
I'm not confused, my comment was a personal preference ... not a technique criticism. Your portrait experience far exceeds mine, so I can only say what does, or does not appeal to me.
Originally posted by Gil P:
Originally posted by rktdesign:
Originally posted by Gil P:
Ok... The shallow dof, shallow dof is not always a bad thing as it serves to soften the rear elements and define distances... |
Very well said..please scream this from a mountain top somewhere so that others may also hear this truth...not that they'll listen, but it's worth a try. |
many people confuse technique and intent. |
|
|
|
|
08/16/2005 11:40:06 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by hopper:
I'm not confused, my comment was a personal preference ... not a technique criticism. Your portrait experience far exceeds mine, so I can only say what does, or does not appeal to me.
Originally posted by Gil P:
Originally posted by rktdesign:
Originally posted by Gil P:
Ok... The shallow dof, shallow dof is not always a bad thing as it serves to soften the rear elements and define distances... |
Very well said..please scream this from a mountain top somewhere so that others may also hear this truth...not that they'll listen, but it's worth a try. |
many people confuse technique and intent. |
|
This, by no means, was a comment directed at you... I posted the images and I have to accept the comments as they are presented, and I accept yours.
The issues concerning DOF are some of the first that are addressed in such shoots, the distance between the seat and the set and the lens and the focal lennght were meticulously calculated in order to get this level of blur with the chosen f-stop (3.2) relative to the light levels... little is left to chance.
Message edited by author 2005-08-16 11:40:46. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 11:49:22 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
Did you say this was for an album cover? What kind of music? I have to say I probably wouldn't see this on any CD I would want to buy, but that's just my taste in music. |
It's for Mango Music world, this artist sits between "lounge & traditional arabic music" a very peculiar mixture, enjoyable but hard to classify.
here:
www.bassalindos.com
www.christineatallah.com
might help!
Message edited by author 2005-08-16 11:50:55. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 11:57:20 AM · #15 |
| I am a fan of world music, and I hope I don't upset anyone if I say that the album cover here strikes me as cheesy and unimaginative. She has a great gallery on her website and is a great looking girl. I'm sure technically they're competent photos, but I'm missing spirit and emotion in them. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 12:01:59 PM · #16 |
| Just listened to tracks on her website... what a beautiful jazz voice! Not quite as convinced by her classical singing, but she has a beautiful tone. |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 12:02:02 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I am a fan of world music, and I hope I don't upset anyone if I say that the album cover here strikes me as cheesy and unimaginative. She has a great gallery on her website and is a great looking girl. I'm sure technically they're competent photos, but I'm missing spirit and emotion in them. |
Point taken. I find them quite apealing myself but I did not create the concept. Hopefully...you'll be part of the minority! |
|
|
|
08/16/2005 12:05:38 PM · #18 |
| I'm aligned with Bobster on this one. |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 01:05:26 AM · #19 |
I agree somewhat with Bob, except that I think number three does show a playful emotion, only I personally find the intentional out of focus rings on her fingers distracting. Number one is ok but not alive enough, Number two doesn't tell me anything, Number 4 would have to be my pick although it isn't very exciting. The black and white one doesn't seem to be too flattering to her nose.
I think it would have been awesome if you took the concept of Number 3 and used a thin veil instead of her fingers that would have shown a blur of her mouth and nose but would draw attention to her eyes. These are all just my personal preference.
So jealous of your studio, probably gives me a bias opinion, LOL
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:02:27 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by Gil P:
Ok... The shallow dof, shallow dof is not always a bad thing as it serves to soften the rear elements and define distances... |
Here's me thinking that DOF draws the eye to the focal point of the image. So unless this is her nose, in my humble opinion the DOF is still too shallow.(esp. //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=218633) |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:08:18 AM · #21 |
You added a bracket, which I've removed.
I've not one to talk, but I'm not sure about focusing on the nose? Doesn't seem very aesthetic? Kind of makes it look bigger than it is. :-/
|
|
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: 04/19/2024 07:34:47 AM EDT.
