2nd Attempt - Studio - Matthew

These were cropped for spec for proof - not the actual image sizing. Hence the tight crop - not properly composed for print at the moment.
As commented previously in many threads skin tone and post-processing is a personal preference - but thank you for your comments and I will look at this in the future. As out of the whole images - I think there are only a "couple" the rest are "in tone with each other as a set" I dont feel it necessary to change every image [ at the minute]



DiddyDave has done two images which are tweaked - which I am posting cos he's having issues with his gallery.
This is what has been done.
These were both opened in Levels, and the black eye dropper was clicked on the pupils of his eyes. This increased the contrast and saturation making him a slightly odd colour, so they were both then desaturated by 15%

2176162310_3ed4c83c8f.jpg

2175370441_c20eb9b12c.jpg
 
:thinking:

thems ok if you like that kind of shot...












:naughty:



:clap: well done there dell looks like you are enjoying your work of late and its showing..


md(y)
 
Have to say I'm with Hacker on this one. They're looking a bit washed out on this monitor which has just been calibrated :shrug:

Having said that you've obviously got a great way with the kid and a knack for catching some great expressions, nice one :)
 
Question.
Cos of the colouring issue thats been brought up I have been back and visited them in my files. When I open up PS and open a file to view and then "flick" between this screen [images] and the PS image...
My PS Image doesnt look as "washed out" as these ones do...for some reason. :LOL:
 
Okay - my 2p time - having directly compared the two above alongside Adele's originals, where I increased contrast a bit re Hacker's comment - and there are no blown areas on these two in either version - I have to say they look better as Adele's originals

And are certainly more in keeping with how a client prefers them output from me anyhow

What happens in my environment is that you develop a style and clients come to you for that style - I have never I'll say that louder NEVER had a client query the quality, clarity, exposure, anything about the images I give them

They are Wowed every time (y)(y)(y)

For a 2nd attempt, these are very good - we've already discussed where they can be improved, which funnily enough aren't points raised here by anyone else :):):)

Glad you like them

Cheers all

DD
 
Hope you don't mind had a play with number 7 just to move the eyes slightly, so he is looking more at you.

del-edit.jpg


Not great attempt but you get the idea.

If you want me to remove it just say the word.

Lee
 
Clever, but sick!!!

He's terrifying now :LOL:



As for Inaglo's query - sorry for the delay - yes it was more about framing and angle to the child, Adele shot a bit low on many of these and the whole batch needed some taking from above the eye-line, but he'd had enough by then - newbies to this sort of work always shoot much slower as it's not instinctive with regards to angles/framing/focusing etc. so kids can get bored before the shoot should be over

Some points on TP were about the framing as in it's too tight, or not using the 3rds idea - on screen here I think we should show the child as big, any print/canvas has the position changed relative to the frame size and utilises space aplenty

When shooting the child, you want the image frame very tight to the child to ensure the max number of pixels record the kid, no point having them record empty space as we can add that later

(y)(y)(y)

DD
 
InaGlo said:
Thanks for that Dave (y)

Ha! ha! you talk of us noobs being slow .... he'd be in High-school by the time Id finished! :p
Click to expand...


:LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:

I'll not invite you in for a session then!

Shooting kids like this is somewhat akin to what the Press togs do and requires equal anticipation and fast reactions, added to lots of patience

Paddying, screaming, shouting, swearing happens when the little darlings have left - and to be fair, is usually directed at the parent not the child

Many parents need... :bat::bat::bat:

DD
 
:LOL::LOL::LOL:
Usually the parents at my two shoots have been fine - but then I'm shooting children of the people that I know - so I would be ok :D
However I've heard of one or two stories of DD's and the parents. :LOL:

Next session - Friday AM - No doubt they'll be pictures ;)

AimCrop as close as possible
Get some more from "above" angles before the child has enough
Keep smiling
Swear after they've left.
 
These are really excellent and it just goes to show how a known good light setup can free you to get on and concentrate on the shots. :)

The only gripe for me is some of them are a bit tight in the frame, but that's small potatoes and easily sorted - well done you!

And I now see that DD has covered the tight framing anyway.
 
CT said:
These are really excellent and it just goes to show how a known good light setup can free you to get on and concentrate on the shots. :)

The only gripe for me is some of them are a bit tight in the frame, but that's small potatoes and easily sorted - well done you!

And I now see that DD has covered the tight framing anyway.
Click to expand...

Thank you CT - yeah the tight framing is to get as much as the kid in as possible as DD has very rightly pointed out.
Yep - an excellent set up - good mentor and look what you can turn out! :LOL::D
 
he he...my gawd, your really flying with these.
well done delli(y)

all the good stuff has allready been said, so its a measure of how good they are that the only nit pick I can see technically (and I dont measure composition much cos its pretty subjective in this type of shot) is, the slightly uneven background lighting, from the right it kinda bleeds into his shirt on the first few.
Its only set up, but set up is time consuming if you strive for perfection.

besides that....they're just great..
 
joxby said:
he he...my gawd, your really flying with these.
well done delli(y)

all the good stuff has allready been said, so its a measure of how good they are that the only nit pick I can see technically (and I dont measure composition much cos its pretty subjective in this type of shot) is, the slightly uneven background lighting, from the right it kinda bleeds into his shirt on the first few.
Its only set up, but set up is time consuming if you strive for perfection.

besides that....they're just great..
Click to expand...


Interesting comment Jox me ol'm8 - but he's 5ft in front of the area where the background could effect him anything but evenly - so I have no idea what you mean there... unless...

If you meant foreground? Then yes it is uneven, cos there's only one light and it's meant to be uneven - the slightly blown ones are as the wee mite got a bit too close at times. When I'm shooting them I either up the f-stop a bit as they crawl forwards or usually wait for a better position. Here Adele took the shots and although a bit blown in places, the image more than makes up for it IMHO

Glad you like them

(y)(y)(y)

DD
 
I mean the white areas to the left and right of cheeky Charlie, brighter on the right than the left.
Maybe he did squirm a little close to the flash, obviously from the right.
I'm looking for an even background, maybe its the product/still life shooter in me, but I'm not the client or partie to the photographers intention, so I can shut up:muted:

I can catagorically say, and I wont be argued with on this point.....they are, very nice shots..:D

Delli....word, if these shots you've been banging out recently don't fill you with confidence, I don't know what will...keep it rolling..
 
Ahhh - I get where you're coming from now

The tog's intention is to use 1 modelling light (but very softly) on the RHS and up a bit - the background is lit only to make it white - one benefit is you don't have to frame an image in 1/3rds or any such as it's only white space anyway and can be added at will later for composition

That it is blown a bit is what happens when the little sods move about, and we can either shoot it anyway and see if the image 'works' though has faults, or delete them or even not take them when the babes move away from the 'sweet spot' of the lighting

Adele kept firing when he was in the 'wrong' spot as the image looked worthy - the client cried - so it doesn't matter a damn technically

Now in product shots, you'd be cruxified for that - :LOL:

I'll stick with kids, it's easier !!!

DD
 
No 10 looks fantastic :)

I love the expression on his wee face and his hands going lol :)

Brilliant shots :D
 
I love the lighting in this series. Could you give me a brief description of the lighting set-up?
 
joxby said:
I can catagorically say, and I wont be argued with on this point.....they are, very nice shots..:D

Delli....word, if these shots you've been banging out recently don't fill you with confidence, I don't know what will...keep it rolling..
Click to expand...

Thank you Joxby - and you're debate with DD! :LOL: I just want to say thanks. They have filled me with some confidence and I am very happy with how they've come out. I still have a lot to learn - but I think that just comes with time.

DiddyDave said:
Adele kept firing when he was in the 'wrong' spot as the image looked worthy - the client cried - so it doesn't matter a damn technically

Now in product shots, you'd be cruxified for that - :LOL:

I'll stick with kids, it's easier !!!

DD
Click to expand...

:LOL::LOL: As long as they cry thats all that matters!

SusanWardrop said:
No 10 looks fantastic :)

I love the expression on his wee face and his hands going lol :)

Brilliant shots :D
Click to expand...

Glitter said:
No 7 for me - awesome
Click to expand...

Thank you guys :)

nfulcher said:
I love the lighting in this series. Could you give me a brief description of the lighting set-up?
Click to expand...

Two lights on the background to light it completely. One at the LHS and one at the RHS and a softbox at the front RHS...
Its DiddyDave's studio - so if I have anything wrong I'm sure he'll come and put me right. :LOL:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top