A&P cc needed

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by alexromo, Oct 20, 2008.

  1. alexromo

    alexromo New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wahiawa
    1
    [​IMG]

    2
    [​IMG]

    3
    [​IMG]

    4

    [​IMG]

    i totally forgot to move that damn trashcan out of the way :o
     
  2. alexromo

    alexromo New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wahiawa
  3. xenon supra

    xenon supra OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    33,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    what is your method for resizing, i can see stairsteps on her legs. something is strange.

    make sure in photoshop you are using "best for reduction" rather than "smooth gradients"
     
  4. alexromo

    alexromo New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wahiawa
    damn, never thought of using that method

    thanks, ima see whats up
     
  5. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    The light's too harsh on the one side, which is casting some stark shadows... it doesn't really work for this set. if you've got a softbox, or can adjust the output on your flash, either do that, or move it further back from your subject. consider adding another light to the opposite side as well. With the exception of her obviously being posed, and the off camera lighting, it does come off a bit like a snapshot, just due to the harshness of the light. of the overall set... 3's the worst. She's just oddly contorted, and you can't really see her face as a result... she looks like she's got some sort of palsy. 2 is the best, though a white, or lighter colored shirt would have been better against the brown couch... the light isn't as harsh, the shadows less violent than the rest of the set, and she looks comfortable, or natural in that position.
     
  6. alexromo

    alexromo New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wahiawa
    just the kind of cc i was looking for

    thanks dude :)
     
  7. Smork

    Smork Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    16,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Socal
    Who is that? :naughty:
     
  8. Dwight Schrute

    Dwight Schrute New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    8,616
    Likes Received:
    0
    The light is really harsh. You need an umbrella or softbox. Either that or try bouncing off the ceiling or wall behind you.
     
  9. Spurious

    Spurious New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,219
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, Texas Bans: 5
    These are epically terrible. I waited the entire week of my ban to come back here just to describe the many ways these photos fall below even POTN standards.

    They all have massive shadows, please, for the love of god, soften your light. I feel like it's a 1930s movie and you're trying to show someone sneaking up on her. You OWE it to female models to put them in good light.

    She's uncomfortable, clearly. Probably from not knowing if she's going to be charged for the privilege of having these terrible photos taken of her. Weird outfit on the first and second photo, black t-shirt and green shoes... Not to mention you didn't even get her face in the photo, but you didn't not get it either. It's just a weird picture that looks like you snapped it during a pose transition.

    The same goes for the second photo except she looks depressed to be there, the legs are also very awkward and you get no impression of her face; it's just blasted with light and flat as hell. The black t-shirt with obscured logo drags my attention right away from her and makes me think, "Was the logo of the shirt relevant? Is this an advertisement for whatever the logo is?" but clearly not because you can't tell what it is. It's just careless.

    The third is just funny to me because you managed to make a moderately attractive girl look like she's had a stroke. Eyes closed, head tilted to the side and back and her cheek is distorted because of the movement. Did you ask her to flail around as if she's having a seizure while you spray and pray? And if so, was that the best one?

    Finally... I'll comment on the setup. Could you have possibly picked a more distracting background? Were there no solid walls you could have used? You had to put her in front of vertical blinds? There wasn't a nice steaming pile of buffalo shit to use instead? It's like you wanted to feature the most detracting thing possible, and not only that, but you even had them half closed in one of the shots. As for the first photo, did you think the door needed to be in the shot too?

    When I look at these, I really just ask myself "What could you possibly have been thinking?" It's like you got a moderately attractive girl and you thought that's all you needed. You had zero consideration for the background, you lighting and the look for the model herself.

    What really frightens me is that these were your best. And I know you took many more than were on the site you posted. Of those I really only saw one that was anyway close to being a decent photo, but again, there are background issues.
    http://blue-atom.org/efurn/content/jink_mdub_0045_large.html

    When you take a photo you need to understand and be aware of every single element in the frame, putting the subject in the box and pushing the button is not enough, not even close. You need to sculpt photo from the surroundings, removing everything that doesn't belong in your vision until you're left with a good photo.
     

Share This Page