|
ConfusedUs posted:
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2009 06:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:26 |
|
|
Without getting too involved in this debate, and taking on the general question of what makes a portrait: I think that capturing that person's "human"-ness is the magic. That's an obvious statement, though it's easy to get lost. Life is always about balance, and making a technically good photo is what you expect, but if you can also get that moment, that flash of a person's humanity... people in live events are great to cover for this. Everybody puts on masks to the world and they switch off as they go through the day. I found my best photos are when I have the technical stuff already taken care of and I catch the subject in-between changing those "masks." It's the little hard nut that is tough to crack, but when you do it releases a fragrant spice that makes it work. For me so far I have done it relatively few times, in relation to the number of photos I've done, so I work on refining that approach to get what I want more often. I don't profess to fully get Reichstag's work, or lodar's for that matter, but I'm always paying attention when they post something. They have a vision and sometimes they fail, but if you spend life afraid of failing, you probably always will. Having the confidence to continue pushing yourself, while always being satisfied where you are, is part of the balance.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2009 11:26
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I remember when you first posted this, and it remains one of my favorite SA photos. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2009 19:51
|
|
|
I'm set to shoot a musician for my paper to use in an article about him. This is my first time shooting someone formally in such a capacity, and I'm nervous because I don't want to make him/the photos generic. This would be a shoot with him and his guitar, though my editor said I pretty much could do whatever I wanted as long as it's interesting. I need some general advice, obviously I have to conceive it myself though. I'll be meeting him Monday afternoon and the photos are due by Wednesday preferably.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2009 14:00
|
|
|
HPL posted:Let the photo fit the genre of music and the personality of the musician. If they're wild and crazy, use a wide or ultra-wide lens to get that exaggeration of perspective. If it's a quiet singer-songwriter type, use a telephoto to get more of a "proper" portrait. You also have to decide whether you want to portray the musician or the musician's on-stage persona, which can be two totally different things. Pick a location that can inspire spontaneity.  I wish I had lit him on the subject-left side to add a bit of definition. I also would choose to pay attention to the strap and put the right collar over, rather than under, it. Make it look more like "Oh I'm a wandering musician, just passing through" casual. It was more difficult than I anticipated to previsualize what I wanted in the end. I've started taking notes, and hopefully next time I shoot a new person I can at least meet them once before the shoot. Is that reasonable to expect out of editorial stuff like this, or is it always going to be this way?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 09:19
|
|
|
My editor told me to go nuts, they treat it as a photo illustration. Though I love that sign and made sure it was in the picture. :/ I turned it in Wednesday, they were happy with them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2009 08:07
|
|
|
HPL posted:That's why it's good to have someone along to help you out, be it a friend or an actual photographer's assistant. They'll see things the little things to adjust or think of things you didn't because you were busy with technical stuff. Also, if you're trying to pitch a photo idea to the subject, a second opinion can help sway things big time. Here's the published article by the way: http://volumeone.org/magazine/articles/979/LISTEN_Greg_Gilbertson.html Penpal posted:
 I love the gently caress out of this. I too have been on a flash-in-the-dark strike of sorts lately. Also I find it hard to believe that you like this "besides the splurge splurge bokeh bokeh bokeh" when it's such a prominent element in the photo.  You wanna clean up those ridiculously hard edges around her shoulders etc though. I assume that happened during post processing?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2009 08:03
|
|
|
LuisX posted:I would have used a stronger light, maybe a smaller umbrella, but everything else checks out 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2009 07:15
|
|
|
HPL posted:Shooting with a brick background is okay, but what I probably would have done is moved the models further away from the wall so the wall isn't so bright. If it were darker, the models would stand out more. Moving the models further away would also help blur the background somewhat as well since it wouldn't be as close to the focal plane. Gambl0r posted:I also was shooting these in a room the size of a small cubicle and had no way of moving the model away from the wall to allow for light falloff to darken the background.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 15:47
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:Does anyone have a copy of the posing guide? http://jzportraits.home.att.net/chapter-01.html
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2010 07:51
|
|
|
I'm guessing hella high pass filter too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2010 09:10
|
|
|
My friend wanted to play dress-up and I needed off-camera lighting practice. The first three were right before dawn, going for a walking-home-after-a-party-under-moonlight look.   Switch outfits as dawn broke and none of them came out except this. I wanted to machete that bush out of existence.  Feel free to point out every mistake. I wish I'd scouted the location first. We're doing more shoots this Summer so this was glorified practice, the first time I've really had a go with  STROBES
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2010 07:27
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:What was the lighting set-up on the second and third? I think those turned out well light wise. I think the poses could be a bit more interesting, or maybe a prop could come in handy. Something like a rock or a fence might be nice to have the model interact with.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2010 08:25
|
|
|
Cross_ posted:You were using strobes so there's no excuse for camera shake. In particular the first photo with its 0.5 sec exposure is too blurry. Keep the dawn photo it looks awesome with the sun's back/side lighting.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2010 01:05
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Why is she carrying a lantern if it's totally bright out enough to see? Here is more how I would have balanced it. Probably a snooted strobe with a gel (or post) to make it look like the orange lantern, then killed the ambient till it's there, but barely.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2010 09:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:26 |
|
|
These are people with "dark skin" which may be messing you up.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2010 22:42
|
|