Hello!
I often stubmle upon on photography, sometimes made by beginners, sometimes full time photographers, that look just terrible.
There is example number one - https://www.facebook.com/pg/makeupmagdagrycza/photos/?tab=album&album_id...
And i always thought that this must be mostly about the lighting, that is too hard and too flat, and partially about the post-processing.
However, right now I'm watching Nick Knight tutorial on lighting.
https://imgur.com/a/KJefO - this was done with one bare flashbulb. And it looks decent.
https://imgur.com/a/vV8cG - this is with huge softbox, looks even better.
And i don't get it. I'm looking at an image made with bare flashbulb, which is the hardest lighting source imaginable. And it looks decent.
Then i look at images from example 1, and they are absolutely terrible but i can't understand why they are so awful.
Can anyone solve this mystery?
It's funny you bring this up. Sometimes I too wonder how is it possible to make someone look so bad when you have a studio at your disposal and breaking down a bad image is sometimes more difficult than figuring out how a good one was shot. Let me try to guess what is going on in the shots on Facebook you linked to.
I think we can all agree the best shot is the second one with the darkest shadows. It's easy to tell that a single light was used in that shot. It's not great but it's not horrible.
The other shots look so bad because the photographer is using cross lighting. Notice the 2 reflections in her eyes in the first shot and notice the shadows going in both directions under her hands. Cross lighting (or 45 45 degree lighting) is the worst thing you can do in the studio as it kills light direction and mood and flattens everything out. You can easily see this in the shot where she is eating sunglasses. The back wall is showing a shadow on each side of her. Don't do it!
Instead, set your key light to produce flattering shadows on your subject and then, if you want to tone down dark shadows, add a fill card or add another larger light from that same side or from the camera so that you don't produce double, crossing shadows.
I have no problem with poor images posted by beginners - usually a relative or spouse has told them their stuff is great. Rather like those terrible entrants into Idols :) My usual rant is against 'professionals' that are looking for people to pay them for amateurish images. This goes double in the case of some wedding photographers....
Some of the images linked on Facebook as Lee said are lit using cross lighting. It rarely looks good.
The bigger issue is the light placement , exposures and colour.
It all comes down to the photographers experience with light and studio equipment. You can get good and bad stuff from both beginners and professionals alike.
Just because someone has a title saying Professional photographer does not mean they can shoot worth a shit.
A lot of it boils down to people buying new shit when they don't know what they had does let alone the new gear. You see people on YouTube teaching studio photography and you can tell they have no clue themselves. Many could benefit from slowing down and walking before they run.
Edward Weston was right after all.
I am starting to do paying clients this year (people photography but not in studio though) and I have wondered exactly the same. I see great photos from professionals, but also photos that just look bad and it's hard to understand how the photographer hasn't noticed it himself. Maybe that shows how bad we are at analyzing our own work. And the better you are at analyzing something, the better chances you have to improve.