I don't often shoot "normal" portraits

thought this was pretty good
Attachments
 Cindy-0810-4625.jpg - 94.72 KB - 62 views

Logged

-----------------------------------
Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before. -- Mae West

Chattanooga Portrait Photographer BobEdens.com

Well, I don't shoot "normal" portraits much either.  So I am not sure how much help I will be, but I'll give you my opinion because it's all I have Smiley

Her expression is fantastic.  It appears to be great timing because she isn't laughing in an unflattering way, nor is her smile fading.  It's caught right at that beautiful moment in between. 

However, I think your position is a tad too high, I think cropping a smidge off the top actually would help the composition, making her fill more of the frame and making there be less space which will minimize the too high angle, even though it's a minor thing to fix it will help.
I don't understand why her arms are positioned the way they are, giving her a hunched over appearance (accentuated by the high angle).  Although, given that her expression was so great perhaps it was better to shoot right at that moment rather than to refine each thing.  However, if it was fixable I would have fixed it.

Lighting - I don't really want to touch it because honestly it's not my favorite but I can't figure out why it looks the way it does.  I wish it was softer.  Also, what is your ISO?  There is no exif data.  There appears to be some noise/grain either from high ISO or from an underexposed image being lightened.  I can't tell and I know it's a small image so I could be mistaken.

Anyway, there is my novel-length opinion.  Take it for what it's worth from a non-portraitist.
Logged


Ed S. should chime in.

Bob, I think you needed to tell us that you only have ex amount of lights and maybe a reflector etc. to use. Suggestions could be given on how to place them for future shoots.


Posture, she's not sitting tall, causing her shoulders to round over, she's sitting on the stool fully, should be about a 1/3 of the stool which would cause her to sit tall because it will feel uncomfortable.

Turned body 1/4 and slight tilt of head needed.

Light, I believe is on the wrong side, this is Ed's department. The light should be on the other side because the wider part of her face is her left Our right, which should have the slight shadow  to make it look narrow.

Kudos for the effort, I have a hard time with Portraits too.
Logged


Thanks for the comments/suggestions. I didn't remember until Susie said something but I was having a terrible time with light that day, I was using a 48" softbox only. Finally figured out my camera was set on auto-iso so although I set it on 200 the meter decided to turn it WAY up not knowing there was going to be a flash. As far as posing, she was nervous as a cat, and it showed. Took a while to get her to calm down then she was fine.

Great idea about the stool (1/3) and I don't want to sound like I'm making excuses, I really wanted to see how you guys "graded" this image, very interesting.
Logged

-----------------------------------
Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before. -- Mae West

Chattanooga Portrait Photographer BobEdens.com

Review for: BobEdens Panel Member: Ed Shapiro Review date: 11/21/2008 1:01 am ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi- It’s me chiming in!
First of all, what’s a normal portrait? There are certain rules and traditional approaches but there are also vast differences in style and there is nothing wrong with that. What a dull world it would be if everyone took exactly the same approach to everything- especially in artistic endeavors Thing is, however, when a formal or classical portrait is made, certain mistakes in a studio portrait procedures tend to stick out like a sore thumbs- there is not any scenic environment, props or any embellishments to distract from minor aesthetic issues. There is just the subject, isolated on a dark background- the photographer is in charge of the pose and lighting and you are on your own- so to speak. It’s a hard job sometimes to tell a story or capture the essence of a person under such austere circumstances. Facial analysis and corrective procedures, if required to render a flattering likeness, become job 1- you either sink or swim. In this portrait the expression is indeed happy and pleasant bit the lighting is a bit harsh- perhaps a softer light source may have helped. A softer or lower ratio might be better as well. The lighting is what is technically called “unclean” by grouchy old traditional portraitists like me. That is not a derogatory term- what it indicates is that the lighting is not clean butterfly lighting or a modified butterfly (loop lighting) nor is it a clean Rembrandt (AKA closed loop lighting). There is nothing wrong with in between lightings, per se, in some situations but in this case it has cause an unflattering area the right side of her face. The lighting also causes a bit of asymmetry which might indicate that the main light MAY have been better coming in from the other direction. It’s hard to tell without seeing the subject in person. The lighting is too split and it is causing elongation of her face. The posture is not quite right and the composition is a bit stagnant. I hope this helps, Ed Big Grin
« Last Edit: November 22, 2008, 11:13:08 PM by Ed Shapiro »
Logged

Ed Shapiro
The Hintonburg Studio
Suite 201  78 Hinton Avenue North
Ottawa, Ontario CANADA  K1Y 0Z8
613-792-4837    Email:  edshapiro@rogers.com

Yes it helps! thanks to all for the comments.
Logged

-----------------------------------
Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before. -- Mae West

Chattanooga Portrait Photographer BobEdens.com