Beginner My first Model shoot

Where's the pictures?

Edit - I see you removed them. I may have commented had I seen them. Pity you removed them though a reminder like this may had resulted in some feedback for you.
 
Last edited:
Post the pics again, I usually comment even though I have no idea what I'm talking about most of the time. Must have missed this one.
 
Thanks everyone for your comments, and also to the 197 viewers who cba'd to comment before in a way. I have learned a little about myself and ended up feeling quite philosophical about it all, so no hard feelings, actually I feel a bit silly for letting it get to me in the first place.
 
Last edited:
@Brian_of_Bozeat - Don't worry about. Sometimes on this forum the posts just don't gather momentum then other times they take off!!!! and like you I have been very frustrated and deflated (however I don't leave enough feedback as i should) there is a few people on here who 99% time will post a reply and hats off to them people. Try not to take it too personal although that can be hard and sometimes
 
I'm going to be completely honest and say I did see this post and the images, what I didn't want to do is just say nice set and like them, I wanted to offer constructive critique but I find it very difficult to put into words what I want to say with out coming across as being rude so I was pondering on how to write it out then I went away on holiday and I completely forgot......sorry

I think maybe you should of just bumped it back to the top of the page.

Please repost the images as I'm sure you will get plenty of very helpful advice/critique

Thank Mickey
 
Last edited:
Brian, you have to repost the shots now you've created so much interest.
 
What an odd place this is.

When I ask for feedback and no one responds. I withdraw the images and everyone is interested!

Just to show there's no hard feelings I have posted one of my shots from this wekend HERE
 
dancook said:
Having searched and found the images on the other forum you posted :D a couple of thoughts about #2

The location does not suit the subject's demeanour.
Shooting down from above can make the subject look vulnerable, whilst shooting from below can make them look powerful

So with i think you could start by shooting from a lower perspective.
More interesting light and more suitable location would be something else to work on.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. We are not on the same page here. None of the shots I posted were from above. I'd prefer it if we just dropped this now please. thanks for trying but I'm starting to feel stalked. :D

Edit: you could always comment over there where you found the image you are commenting on - perhaps it would make more sense in the correct context! (y)
 
Last edited:
Brian_of_Bozeat said:
Hmmm. We are not on the same page here. None of the shots I posted were from above. I'd prefer it if we just dropped this now please. thanks for trying but I'm starting to feel stalked. :D

Edit: you could always comment over there where you found the image you are commenting on - perhaps it would make more sense in the correct context! (y)
Click to expand...

Ah I'm not a member of the other forum :D sorry i'll drop it.
 
Sometimes I feel the same- you post what you think is a great image but it gets lost quickly as this is a busy moving forum. Many (me included) tend to look at new posts only, so sometimes miss stuff.
 
Just to make a point Brian, don't read too much into he number of views as this number tends to include a lot of passing traffic (non-members) and bots. Just because you see 197 views, doesn't mean 197 TP members viewed your post (probably not even anywhere near that many).
 
I didn't see the first post, I may or may not have commented even if I had.
I don't understand the reason for removing the photos though. They were doing no harm sitting there in a thread.
Now that you have drawn attention to this everybody wants to see them and you won't post them. I'm a little bit confused .
 
fabs said:
Just to make a point Brian, don't read too much into he number of views as this number tends to include a lot of passing traffic (non-members) and bots. Just because you see 197 views, doesn't mean 197 TP members viewed your post (probably not even anywhere near that many).
Click to expand...

Thanks Fabs.

Nostromo said:
I didn't see the first post, I may or may not have commented even if I had.
I don't understand the reason for removing the photos though. They were doing no harm sitting there in a thread.
Now that you have drawn attention to this everybody wants to see them and you won't post them. I'm a little bit confused .
Click to expand...

I have no need to re post them because I have had the feedback that I wanted now.
 
I don't really understand why you took the photos down to be honest. I've posted images before and hardly got any feedback but I wouldn't remove them as you never know if new members joining may come across the thread and give feedback later on.
 
OK. Fair point Fabs. Lets see what happens.


ORIGINAL POST FOLLOWS:

*************************************************************
Hello everyone, last week I took my first foray into model portraiture.

This is Bobby - He's a local (to me) model and he needed some pictures for his portfolio so we agreed time for pics. In order to give us both plenty of variety for our portfolios I tried to cover a LOT of different looks.

Really I'm after some unbiased critique and suggestions please, all constructive comments very welcome.

Setup 3 - Open Shade-4 by Brian Mead, on Flickr

Setup 6 - The Pond-4 by Brian Mead, on Flickr

Setup 2 - Tough Guy-4 by Brian Mead, on Flickr

Setup 8a - The Grass-2 by Brian Mead, on Flickr

Setup 1 - Nice Guy-5 by Brian Mead, on Flickr

Setup 10 - The Path-4 by Brian Mead, on Flickr

Thanks for looking.

B.
 
In the sake of honesty I'm one of the 197 that saw it and didn't comment. I wasn't that keen on them but most of my issues were with the "model", if he was advertising as a model I'd have been dissapointed if I'd booked to shoot him and that's what he gave from a posing point of view. That said I've no experience shooting models and didn't want to criticise someone I know nothing about.

There wasn't a great deal i could see wrong photographically though most were were a bit flat and central so not a lot to grab my attention and I passed on and forgot about it. There was no slight intended and if you'd bumped it after a day or two someone would most likely have commented. I have to say personally I've found TP one of the better forums and hope you're not put off for one thread that got missed.

For those desperate to see Bobby his photos are still on Flickr but at this point if he's happy with the feedback given it's probably not worth the same thing.

***edit***
ignore last part as they're now reposted.
 
ok to make up for ignoring thread first time my critique...

1. lighting looks a bit flat looking at eyes looks like you've used a reflector in open shade but reflected from below so reflector in that position has flattened out light completely. 35mm from that range has left the background still looking quite busy a longer focal length for head shots will be more flattering for model and isolate background more when nothing particularly interesting in it. Composition is very central with more space at top than necessary. Hard to tell for certain with jpeg compression and size but not sure eyes look entirely sharp. The models expression looks awkward, it's to tight mouthed for happy to wide eyed for serious.

2. Not a fan of the processing of the greens, they're very blue and unnatural . There's a lot of not in focus but not terribly out of focus pond which doesn't add to the story or fit particularly with his look. I'd probably crop vertical to isolate subject. Pose looks like it's meant to be imposing shooting lower with him leaning in to you slightly would have emphasised this.

3. Not sure what the expression is meant to be tbh it looks more unsure than tough. Looks like it's been lit by a bare flash with a gel from looking at shadow of nose. The skin tones look a bit pink/magenta on my work monitor and the shadows are too cold in comparison , I'd have lost the gel or chosen one closer to the natural light and again shooting headshots as tight if your lens goes to 70mm I'd be using it as long as I could.

4. It's a guy sat in the grass at f8 in natural light, not sure what to critique.

5. similar to photo 1 I'd shoot longer than 35 but that's probably a preference thing. The light is flat, possibly aided by fill flash? Composition is dead central and background is a bit fussy due to focal length. Model is giving nothing in his expression in this one.

6. guy walking in park with wide lens and small aperture, again not sure what I'm critiquing?

Viewing them as a set there's very little continuity between any of the images, the exposures and colours are really different in each shot and they'd carry better as a group if they were more consistent imo.

I'll end this by saying I'm by no means an expert I've never shot a model my photos are probably mediocre at best and I'm not trying to be mean. I think the guys let you down even if you'd got all the photography and processing perfect there's not much going on with the model. His body language and facial expressions look awkward and kinda uncofrotable in most and even if you're not used to posing models yourself, if he's a model he should be able to contribute to that as well I'd have thought. Out of the set 3 and 5 are probably the best shots but they lack impact.
 
Last edited:
I think @CraigDHD has covered everything, there's nothing much more I can add to this detailed critique. I agree with the points made above, and second the comment that you were let down by your model.
 
These are surprisingly difficult to comment on, I can see why you initially didn't get much feedback. They're all technically fine - with some minor exceptions - but they don't particularly grab me.

I do shoot models, and male models as often as I can - which isn't often - and when I do I tend to be going for character or physique. I think I've come across Bobby before. Isn't he an actor? I don't know what direction you gave him but these fall somewhere between fashion & environmental portraiture. They're not fashiony enough to work that angle and they don't feel quite genuine, showing the real Bobby, to work as straight portraiture. The lighting is mainly ok but not enough to add interest for its own sake.

I think the second has the most going for it, but for the colours.

How could they be better? The headshots either need less forced or more extreme expressions; the wider ones might work better if he was concentrating on the story telling aspect and perhaps not making eye contact with the camera.

All that said, they're much better than my early outings with models. A good way to get your eye in is to attend a group shoot at a local studio or camera club to see how other people work with models.
 
CraigDHD said:
ok to make up for ignoring thread first time my critique...

1. lighting looks a bit flat looking at eyes looks like you've used a reflector in open shade but reflected from below so reflector in that position has flattened out light completely. 35mm from that range has left the background still looking quite busy a longer focal length for head shots will be more flattering for model and isolate background more when nothing particularly interesting in it. Composition is very central with more space at top than necessary. Hard to tell for certain with jpeg compression and size but not sure eyes look entirely sharp. The models expression looks awkward for subject it's to tight mouthed for happy to wide eyed for serious.

2. Not a fan of the processing of the greens, they're very blue and unnatural . There's a lot of not in focus but not terribly out of focus pond which doesn't add to the story or fit particularly with his look. I'd probably crop vertical to isolate subject. Pose looks like it's meant to be imposing shooting lower with him leaning in to you slightly would have emphasised this.

3. Not sure what the expression is meant to be tbh it looks more unsure than tough. Looks like it's been lit by a bare flash with a gel from looking at shadow of nose. The skin tones look a bit pink/magenta on my work monitor and the shadows are too cold in comparison , I'd have lost the gel or chosen one closer to the natural light and again shooting headshots as tight if your lens goes to 70mm I'd be using it as long as I could.

4. It's a guy sat in the grass at f8 in natural light, not sure what to critique.

5. similar to photo 1 I'd shoot longer than 35 but that's probably a preference thing. The light is flat, possibly aided by fill flash? Composition is dead central and background is a bit fussy due to focal length. Model is giving nothing in his expression in this one.

6. guy walking in park with wide lens and small aperture, again not sure what I'm critiquing?

Viewing them as a set there's very little continuity between any of the images, the exposures and colours are really different in each shot and they'd carry better as a group if they were more consistent imo.

I'll end this by saying I'm by no means an expert I've never shot a model my photos are probably mediocre at best and I'm not trying to be mean. I think the guys let you down even if you'd got all the photography and processing perfect there's not much going on with the model. His body language and facial expressions look awkward and kinda uncofrotable in most and even if you're not used to posing models yourself, if he's a model he should be able to contribute to that as well I'd have thought. Out of the set 3 and 5 are probably the best shots but they lack impact.
Click to expand...

Thanks Craig for taking so much time. (y) I realise reading all of your notes that perhaps a better strategy would have been to post the images for critique one at a time as it's a big ask to put so many up at once. Maybe that's one of the reasons why people didn't comment? :thinking:

Hmmm, regarding your comment about being inconsistent as a set, I did explain in the pre-amble that I/we were looking for lots of different looks to add to both of our portfolios. Hence the wide variation in white balance and colour palettes. but posting them individually would have been better in that respect as well.

#1 - Great feedback. Thanks.

#2 - I was going for unnatural! But thanks for the comments about the "scenario", I hear what you are saying.

#3 - This was a "key shift" shot on Tungsten balance with hard tungsten gelled flash against sunlight to "blue" the ambient and I was trying to create an atmosphere, (something I have been reading on strobist 101) you are quite right it is "over the top" but in my defence I suppose I need to get past the "phase of excessive use" to get it out of my system and learn to be more subtle. After all I AM a beginner (see title of thread) . ;)

#4 - This WAS shot with flash so I'm calling that a win! :D

#5 - Was indeed with reflector. Some good points there worth considering for next time. Thanks.

#6 It was supposed to be a "scene". From what you are saying the narrative clearly failed for you. Thats something else I need to think about for next time.

Thank you for doing this, it has really helped (and was way above and beyond the feedback I had already received).

Cheers,

:cow:
 
juggler said:
These are surprisingly difficult to comment on, I can see why you initially didn't get much feedback. They're all technically fine - with some minor exceptions - but they don't particularly grab me.

I do shoot models, and male models as often as I can - which isn't often - and when I do I tend to be going for character or physique. I think I've come across Bobby before. Isn't he an actor? I don't know what direction you gave him but these fall somewhere between fashion & environmental portraiture. They're not fashiony enough to work that angle and they don't feel quite genuine, showing the real Bobby, to work as straight portraiture. The lighting is mainly ok but not enough to add interest for its own sake.

I think the second has the most going for it, but for the colours.

How could they be better? The headshots either need less forced or more extreme expressions; the wider ones might work better if he was concentrating on the story telling aspect and perhaps not making eye contact with the camera.

All that said, they're much better than my early outings with models. A good way to get your eye in is to attend a group shoot at a local studio or camera club to see how other people work with models.
Click to expand...

Thanks Simon, fair enough they didn't grab you and as Craig says they lack impact too I am hearing the things I need to. Cheers.

I don't blame Bobby at all, suffice to say It was a collaboration and I was happy enough with his efforts. He did as I asked and also offered some of his ideas too. I have plenty more of each set up with different expressions but these are the shots I chose to show.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'm hoping to go on a studio day soon. It would be really good to see someone else working with a model. (y)
 
Sir SR said:
Hi

Can't add more to Craig's crit but thought I'd offer my take on 3.

It looks more purple than blue. You can shoot in raw, use a cto gel on the flash and get the effect you want.

Tried to find an example...excuse the awful pic



Rogue Flashbender test Self Portrait by Sir SR, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Thanks for this, I think we cross posted. That's what I did - read above - I just did it badly! :D
 
Brian_of_Bozeat said:
I'm hoping to go on a studio day soon.
Click to expand...

On nomenclature, to prevent misunderstandings in the future..
'Studio days' are usually where a model takes up residence in a studio for a day and sells one-one 2 hour slots at a discount over the normal studio+model rates.
Group shoots can be lots of people shooting at once, or folk taking it in turns. The former are to be avoided!
Workshops can be anything from a complete bun fight to carefully thought out tuition.
 
juggler said:
On nomenclature, to prevent misunderstandings in the future..
'Studio days' are usually where a model takes up residence in a studio for a day and sells one-one 2 hour slots at a discount over the normal studio+model rates.
Group shoots can be lots of people shooting at once, or folk taking it in turns. The former are to be avoided!
Workshops can be anything from a complete bun fight to carefully thought out tuition.
Click to expand...

Ah, thanks again, yes a workshop is what I meant then. cheers.
 
When posting for critique you're right in less is probably more it's easier to focus in on 1 or 2 images to give more detailed critique. That said if you are trying new ideas out a similar strategy is probably best for the shoot, choose one or two looks and really work them to get the shot you want. I'm a bit adhd in my approach to things and am guilty of rushing a lot but I always find personally if I plan exactly what I'm looking for before hand I always end up with a better image.

With image 3 if you're doing this type of idea you've ran in to a few issues. The biggest one imo are if you're shooting with speedlights you've got the wrong time of day, it takes a lot of power to overcome the sun even when it's overcast and it's forced you to keep the shadows too light for the look you want. The white balance isn't quite right either and you've ended up with as @Sir SR says a pinky purply look instead of that orange blue cross that's more traditional. This type of lighting can work better as well when you've got something in the scene to motivate the light and give it a reason for being different.

I'm not sure it would definitively help these but consider allowing people to edit your images, there shouldn't be anyone who'll do anything maclicious with them but it can help to show a visual to demonstarte a potential fix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top