New studio lights ..........

[macker]

Think I've mentioned before how much I struggle with portraiture stuff but seeing as I really want to improve in this area, I treated myself to a couple of softbox lights. Anyway, my daughter agreed to spare me 10 minutes to have a play (insisting on a change of top half way through :bat:) and this was the result !
I've upped the curves on the background a little, and a bit of dodge and burn here and there, but otherwise, they are pretty much straight out of the camera. All were taken using the 'nifty' 50.

1. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_1.jpg

2. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_2.jpg

3. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_3.jpg

4. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_4.jpg

5. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_5.jpg

6. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_6.jpg

7. (Obviously this one was post processed, I was playing with the curves and contrast and simply liked the result !)
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_7.jpg

The colour reproduction they produce seems good to me but any suggestions for improving my next attempt greatfully received :thumbs:

[tiler65]

Good set.

If you can reproduce the eyes in #3 for #2 & #4 I think you have great shots with dynamic focal points.

Tell your daughter she did well.

[macker]

Thanks Tiler, I'll pass your comment on :thumbs:

I had one softbox above her and to her right and one below her on her left. I think I asked her to turn the wrong way in no.4 !

[Alex S]

The second shot is my favourite for composition and expression, but is lacking the sharp focus in the eyes of number 3. A good set though and you're lucky to have such a willing model!

[macker]

Thanks Alex .........

you're lucky to have such a willing model!

Doubtlessly it'll cost me somewhere down the line ! :D:lol:

[macker]

Ok, I've tried reprocessing a couple of these to 'smooth' the skin a little and soften the image. Is this a good idea with portrait type pictures or does it look too un-natural ?

1. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_8.jpg

2. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/macker/steph/steph_9.jpg

Thanks.

[tiler65]

nice try

#1
(in my opinion) but a little too much in the cheeks, the chin line sems to disappear and her top lip seems as if you tried something and forgot to change it.

#2
the photo itself is spot on but the pose, if you lowered her left elbow so it came from the corner of the frame, it would lead you to her outstanding eyes.

Top work. :clap: :clap: :clap:

[macker]

Thanks tiler, looking forward to trying some more of this now !

[Janice]

I would try one light on the background and one as a key light 45 degrees to the side and above her a bit.

the background obviously wasnt lit enough as can be seen thru the chinks in her hair in No.1

This would make the bg pure white and eliminate the need for photoshop work there.

lovely shots though.. and a nice daughter too :thumbs:

[macker]

Thanks Janice, I was thinking myself that I may need an extra light just to blow out the background :thumbs:

[DiddyDave]

Lights below the eyeline are a feature of theatre shots (limelight), but shouldn't be done at all in this type of portraiture for me; and Janice is spot on about the obvious PP to cure a badly lit background

It's far better to learn to correctly use one light in front of the model before adding others

Here's one with just one keylight and the background blown to white, it's had almost no PP at all and was one of a proof set for her parents to see what's what

In the early days of this sort of work - keep it simple - would be my advice :thumbs:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/500/18mm_lens_4.jpg

[macker]

Thanks Dave, I'll have a play :thumbs: