Critique Shoot with Katy & new watermark!

Messages
6,964
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all

I've not posted for a while & intend to start doing so more often! Will also visit some other threads offering C&C!

Anyhow....any thoughts welcome on the this shot - composing, posing & processing! Also I have a new watermark which is less intrusive than my previous one and hopefully looks a little more modern!

Shot was taken on Canon 1DsIII + 70-200 f/2.8 MKII

I used one off-camera flashgun - on a tripod camera right.

Thanks for looking!

Phil

p2299260223-6.jpg


Camera make:Canon
Camera model:Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III
Focal length:200 mm
Max lens aperture:f/2.8
Exposure:1/1600 at f/2.8
Flash:Fired, compulsory mode
Exposure bias:-1 2/3 EV
Exposure mode:Auto
Exposure prog.:Aperture priority
ISO speed:ISO 200
Metering mode:Pattern
 



Very nice take there, Phil!
… but the vignette…
 
like the picture but not the tats on the arm it draws your eye from her lovely face sorry
 
but not the tats on the arm


I wanted to note that but, some months ago, a bunch
of chihuahuas attacked my heels reminding that words
may not be dropped about these. Was / is it still true?
 
The tattoos are her choice :)

The watermark looks good and non-intrusive.
 
Really liking this Phil.
Tattoos are fine by me, they are part of her character, the essence of which you are attempting to capture.
Thank you for posting the data.
I do struggle with flash, perhaps you could answer the following?
1/1600 used, is that only via HSS?
-12/3 ev, that reduces the background exposure, but compensated by the flash for the model only?
Exposure mode auto, is this ETTL on the flash?
Apologies if the questions are simple, but they would help me understand how you achieved the remarkable image.
 
like the picture but not the tats on the arm it draws your eye from her lovely face sorry

Yes - whilst tats would not be for me, having spoken to her at length about them I accept they are important and precious to her.

I wanted to note that but, some months ago, a bunch
of chihuahuas attacked my heels reminding that words
may not be dropped about these. Was / is it still true?

It's an aesthetic choice - I didn't pick her as a model because of them, but nor did I preclude her for them!

The tattoos are her choice :)
The watermark looks good and non-intrusive.

Thanks!
 
I love it, superbly lit and detailed, and the ink is part of her so no crit from me.

The only thing I may have tried would be to subdue the bright sky evenly as opposed to the rather strong vignette.
 
Really liking this Phil.
Tattoos are fine by me, they are part of her character, the essence of which you are attempting to capture.
Thank you for posting the data.
I do struggle with flash, perhaps you could answer the following?
1/1600 used, is that only via HSS?
-12/3 ev, that reduces the background exposure, but compensated by the flash for the model only?
Exposure mode auto, is this ETTL on the flash?
Apologies if the questions are simple, but they would help me understand how you achieved the remarkable image.

Delighted you ask - mixing flash and ambient light is never simple!

Yes - I used a Canon 580EXII in HSS mode & Hahnel tough triggers.

It can be tricky using ETTL whilst reducing background exposure relative to the subject - sometimes it screws up & overexposes the model, but then on manual you can't have HSS so you are stuck with a lower shutter speed and hence greater aperture and less separation from the background. From experience I know that a flash that is not heavily off axis (just about 35 degrees in this case) - SO....basically I dialled in a minus exposure to darken the background a little and left the flash on AUTO ETTL & with a few test shots adjusting flash position and compensation for background I settled on the above settings!

Thanks for the kind compliment!


Phil
 
I love it, superbly lit and detailed, and the ink is part of her so no crit from me.

The only thing I may have tried would be to subdue the bright sky evenly as opposed to the rather strong vignette.

Thanks, David. I rather like vignettes and I know they are not to everyone's taste. I tried with & without and felt with gave slightly more 'weight' to the middle of the image, drawing the eye, but I absolutely accept others would have preferred it without the vignette.

I have others to process from the shoot and I'll definitely not vignette them all!
 
I wanted to note that but, some months ago, a bunch
of chihuahuas attacked my heels reminding that words
may not be dropped about these. Was / is it still true?

Only comments regarding the photography are considered acceptable - not aesthetics about the looks of the models. Not my rules, though I understand why.
 
Only comments regarding the photography are considered acceptable - not aesthetics about the looks of the models. Not my rules, though I understand why.

I guess 'the model is ugly and her tats don't help' is not reasonable, whereas 'in this case I think the tats are a distraction - I wonder if clothing that covered her arm might have been better in this case?' is perhaps more reasonable?
 
I think the lighting, composition, location and processing all work well together. A very accomplished image. How did the model feel when she saw it?

Tattoos are a very personal part of someone and so form part of the portrait of that person. I've always thought there's a project there for me
 
I think it's a lovely well constructed image!
The subject or model doesn't come into it!
I've done weddings and the bride and groom are right [emoji200]!
Wouldn't tell them that though!
 
I think the lighting, composition, location and processing all work well together. A very accomplished image. How did the model feel when she saw it?

Tattoos are a very personal part of someone and so form part of the portrait of that person. I've always thought there's a project there for me

Many thanks! This got posted on her page today...

IMG_1495.JPG
 
I think it's a lovely well constructed image!
The subject or model doesn't come into it!
I've done weddings and the bride and groom are right [emoji200]!
Wouldn't tell them that though!

Thanks Mark! Know what you mean - done a few like that myself!
 
Last edited:
It works well, the shapes of the branch and arm with tattoos is particularly effective.

Things I’d have tried to do differently fwiw..
  • I think she’s a bit low in the frame
  • The vignette isn’t to my taste
  • The light could be positioned a bit higher and it’d have worked better if she was more directly facing the light. Then she’d be short lit and the nose shadow would be less intrusive.
I say tried to do differently.. I’m now faced with deciding whether to remove a similar nose shadow on one of my own pics :)
 
Back
Top