Hello Fstoppers.
I have commented on enough of your photos tonight that I thought I should post some for your consideration. These shots were done in the room of a friend of mine. A single continuous light and natural light. Canon 5D II and Samyang 85mm f1.4 and 35mm f1.4 (you should be able to figure out which lenses is which shots!). It was a spur of the moment shoot, very personal with both of us trying to figure out what worked. Learnt a lot and I hope you like the results.
Sorry about the watermarks and I hope they don't detract too much from your experience. If they do, please let me know and I will consider posting without these watermarks.
Regards,
Hugh
Honest opinion?
Pic1 suboptimal framing, the skin looks horrible not sure if the lady had such blotches but if I usually smoothen it out a bit.
Pic2 too dark, TV or frame in the back is irritating. One step to the right and the window in the back would add depth to the pic.
Pic3 OK from post processing but the pose is for me a pornographic submissive one - which I cannot find artsy.
Hello Bernd. Thanks for the feedback. I try not to process the images too much as I find it dishonest. So the skin for the first one is what it is. I do agree see your point though.
As for the second. My background choice wasn't great. It was partly due to our just filming in the only room we had available. It is a window behind her on the right, but due tot the light and the small room, that is where she had to be! Oh well, I will take that on board for next time. As for too dark I don't think I agree, but that is likely just a personal preference thing!
The third on has the more evocative pose, but I was hoping having it fade into nothing would help dissuade the pornographic feel. So I do find it disappointing that you do find it pornographic, as that wasn't the intention. I would like to hear what some others think about this.
Again, thanks for your feedback, I appreciate you taking the time.
Hugh, I am a molecular biologist and there is a huge misconception in "honest" or "real" pictures that many photographers are not aware.
The human eye has a very narrow angle of sharp view - comparable to a long tele lens - try it and focus hard on a distant object and you will find that your sharp view angle is VERY limited.
Hence the human brain is constantly taking pictures and making a panorama out of it with a in between storage similar like the RAM on your PC.
Further more your brain is manipulating the colors according to your memory and experience.
Example:
You are sitting under a green umbrella, your camera picture of the skin is greenish, yet for your human eye it looked perfect.
Reason you brain changes the color to what it knows the should be.
For this reason snow in the evening is not blue but white to your eye too.
The moment you take a camera and choose a focal length you are not honest or true or real any more.
There is not ONE real picture everyone also sees the same thing in the same situation different.
Personally I modify pictures so they match the impression I have in memory.
And that is what the "real" picture always comes to.
An impression influenced modified and tweaked by your powerful human Photoshop processor.
If that is what you achieved with your photos then you should be happy- nothing to worry.
If not - then maybe getting deeper into Lightroom or PS would be an idea.
Most often when I hear the argument "honest" or "real" this photographers simply shy away from the programs.
Hi Hugh, strictly my opinion.
1) not a fan of the angle with the background, although strange angles can be a plus, however the background needs to selective to make it work. The is a dark pole, cut off shelves? not even sure what they are, all of these items should have been seen before the button is pushed. Regarding the skin, a bit of PP to smooth the tones would go a long way. Her position on the bed is great. So minor details to clean up.
2) Moving the model or yourself to achieve a better background would have been the ticket, even if you were shooting down a hallway. There is no 'pop' to the skin, meaning the lighting is a bit too low, nothing that a 1/2 - 2/3 of a stop couldn't fix.
3) I'm ok with this image, yes, its provocative, but it's not lewd... you stated in a response you wanted it to fade out and yet you need to remember that the eyes are always attracted to the brightest part of the image so you would be taking the viewers eyes away from the model eyes, not exactly what you would want to do.
Hello Jon
1) Fair enough, I quite like the texture, but I will clean it up sometime soon and post it to see if people like it more. I could clean up the background in PS, but I don't think it would make the photo better. Completely agree with selecting the background more, but you are stuck with what you are stuck with and my lesson has been learned for next time :-P.
2) Same as the above, I shoot raw so can add another half stop and see if I like it more. I am not sure I would though. You do seem to have some experience in this area though, so worth a go as you may have a point and with two opinions on one side and me on the other I am outweighed!
3) I find my eyes move, but because there is no detail in the left hand side, my eyes naturally come back. Again, I see your point, but don't know if it detracts if my eyes rove and return. Does anyone else want to weigh in?
Thanks for feedback Jon, given me some things to think about.
Hi Hugh,
As a learning exercise, I would really like to see what you can do in post processing, bearing in mind the comments above. Then it would be good to have Bernd and Jon re-comment on the "tweaked" images.