1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. REMINDER

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Portraits

Discussion in 'Appraisal Gallery' started by Aspadora, Oct 8, 2019.

  1. Aspadora

    Aspadora Well-Known Member

    Hi all,

    I joined a photography club in September, and every so often they have a portrait night with a volunteer model.

    This is my first ever attempt at portraits, so I was hoping for some feedback on what works and what doesn't. There were a few uncomfortable moments where we both just stared at each other not knowing what to do!

    [​IMG]DSC_4045 by Michael, on Flickr

    [​IMG]DSC_4026 by Michael, on Flickr

    [​IMG]DSC_4024 by Michael, on Flickr

    [​IMG]DSC_4034 by Michael, on Flickr
     
  2. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Not my subject but a good start I'd say. The first is too tight, second and third very nice, the last a great idea but you'd need a lens with tilt to pull it off.
     
  3. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    I like the second. First as said is far too tight and not at all flattering. Third is also not flattering, but maybe intentionally so. For me the light is just a little to directional. Maybe needed more fill-in from the left. Last is fun, but apart from softness, quite a difference in exposure on the fist. You could knock that back. Also the big flare on her forehead.
     
  4. Aspadora

    Aspadora Well-Known Member

    Thanks both for the feedback! I understand the issues with the first one re: being too close, I was kicking myself afterwards for not having taken a step back.

    When you say that it's not flattering, can you explain what about it isn't? I'm not sure I can see that it's unflattering as such, just maybe a little close?

    Yep that was intentional. Most of the shots I was getting were very smiley and 'pretty', so I wanted to go for a less pretty one. I might look at bringing the shadows on the left up a little bit if they're too dark.

    Thanks, I'll bring the fist down a bit more! I really struggled with the flare on her forehead. Everything I did made it look stupid haha. Is there a technique that is particularly good at that kind of thing?

    Thanks again :)
     
  5. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I'd hazard a guess that it is because the lighting brings out the skin texture and emphasises "imperfections".
     
  6. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Yes basically that. If you're trying for a reality shot, you are not going to pose it looking skywards like that, so the intent seems to be beauty. If that's the case then skin texture is important, plus frizzy hair bits.

    But I'm not sure at this stage of the shoot the OP had really decided what the intent was. Seems to have crystalised more with the second and third, which is understandable. You have to get to know what you are working with and "interrogate" it to find the shot.
     
  7. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Well I had a stab. I think the healing brush is best for this, tidied up at the end with clone stamp. The hand was more a levels issue. I actually took a bit of red out of the face too, as there was just too much tonal difference with the hand. Did some general housekeeping too, see what you think:

    [​IMG]
     
  8. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    That works well. The pose would be a good exercise with a TSE!
     
  9. Aspadora

    Aspadora Well-Known Member

    Thanks, i get what you mean now :) I'm torn slightly with my morals about adjusting skin imperfections - I've smoothed it out slightly in the pictures but didn't like doing it. I might just stay away from those types of shots in future so I have no issues haha.

    Yeah that looks much better. I tried with the healing brush, but obviously wasn't as successful. I will go at it again! Also good spot with removing the red!
     
  10. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    You haven't come across the portrait software packages then! It is more about having a flat light and not over- sharpening texture. I think you can still get deliberately "soft" 135 mm lenses for portraiture that smooth the skin. Adobe recently added a micro-contrast control for adjusting skin texture. The clarity adjustment can also be used but has a less subtle effect.
     
  11. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    It is a big sector. There was shock and horror when digital first came out because of the way it highlighted skin imperfections. Also before that, there was film made to soften portraits. Agfa had a good one called.....Portrait.
     
  12. Aspadora

    Aspadora Well-Known Member

    Nope I've not heard of them! Obviously I do understand why they exist etc, I might just choose to stay away from it for my pictures I think. I'll try your suggestions of the minor adjustments and see how they work out thanks :)
     
    Catriona likes this.
  13. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    Good for you. For me a portrait is a portrait of the person. I'm surprised to see words like not flattering being used here. As for portrait software - please, stay away. You will end up with a mannequin look, entirely false and one more thing for any youngster to obsess about when looking at photoshopped shots.
    Concentrate on the framing of the shot and the lighting and the way different lighting can cast shadows. Those are not always unwelcomed or undesirable. Try high key and low key and see what suits the subject best. Practice makes perfect.
     
    Aspadora and peterba like this.
  14. peterba

    peterba Well-Known Member

    I agree, Kate. F'rinstance, there was no "portrait software" :rolleyes: for Jane Bown to use... yet she managed to do some pretty good stuff. ;)
     
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2019
    Aspadora and Catriona like this.
  15. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    Indeed - and no posing either. She made a grab shot a masterpiece.
     
    peterba likes this.
  16. peterba

    peterba Well-Known Member

    Indeed. Her work is firmly among my favourites... and specifically on portraits, is probably my outright favourite.
     
    Catriona likes this.
  17. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    for your delictation - now at version 18. https://www.anthropics.com/portraitpro/photo_editing_software/new_in_v18/
     
    Catriona likes this.
  18. Aspadora

    Aspadora Well-Known Member

  19. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    They market a version for landscape photographers too I beleive.
     
  20. Gezza

    Gezza Well-Known Member

    I actually like 1&3 as they are quite different to today’s heavy editing/lighting that is everywhere in the image industry. There is obviously room from improvement but don’t be afraid to do your own thing, it has merit.
     
    Aspadora likes this.

Share This Page