Glamour 1™ is loaded with great photographers and models portfolios, forums, photography tips, workshop info and much more than a typical portfolio site. These valuable services increases traffic and operating costs and those that support our community of models and photographers by upgrading their accounts as a Lifetime Member (pay only once, never pay again) enjoy practically no advertising--upgrade now to increase your viewing pleasure while supporting this community and family of glamour photographers and models.
Don't want to see this message or large ads, register, then upgrade now!
OK, I've been a lurker for a very long time...So much so
I feel I know some of the folks here and have come to deeply respect this site and the work I have seen here. It has been a tremendous help to me....
A year ago I was a RANK photo newbie....Now a year later, after alot of reading/surfing and practice, I think I've moved from Rank newbie, to newbie with half a clue.
That being said I think in order to move up in skill I need honest outside critiques of specific photos.
Here is a link to some of the shots I thought were decent:
Please let me request opinions on any of the photos. The names are just the dsc numbers from the camera and are displayed on the top of the photos. I have done little, more like no PP on these.
What I need is opinions on lighting, which I am finding a bit hard. Also I'd like feedback on the poses. In truth feedback on anything, what's good, what's bad and suggestions to improve.
Regards and thanks,
Scott
I'm sure that now that the stage fright of the first post is over posting to this forum will become as addictive as reading it.....
The photos seem to be on the right path, couple of awkward poses, but still on the right path. My one complaint is the layout, it isn't easily viewable and the photo size is a bit too small for tech critiquing.
Looking forward to seeing more and having you on the boards!!
Alicia
Thanks Alicia......I should have mentioned that the photos are clickable and you can also make them fullscreen size.....I hope that gives a better view of the pictures.
I took a look at your work and I will offer a few comments. First off, it seems as if you either have no hair light, or when you do, you're getting flare from it. Make sure you have a snoot or a grid on the hairlight so it will be more directional and not flare into the lens. You DO need one on most of those images to separate a dark haired model from the dark backdrop.
I think some posing guides would be of help. You're not too far off, but try to remember to have the pinky side of the hands facing the camera when at all possible and natural looking. This is the sleekest side of a woman's hand, and will make her look more elegant and feminine.
I only looked at a few of the images. Frankly the user interface is so cumbersome that it just takes too long to view many of the images. Even at the largest size, they are too small for critical viewing. I know if you play around with your user interface you can eventually get to a adequate image size, but its too much work and as you've already seen there will be people who won't find the way to make them much larger. Why make the visitor to your site do so much work. Just have some nice thumbnails and let them zoom to the largest size. Don't wobble, then fade them in, zoom and all the other effects that just slow the process down.
For the two or three I looked at, most were blended into the backgrounds which means there was no a good strategy for separation from the background (background light, hair and rim light, etc).
You'll get much better feed back if you just post 3 or 4 images that are about 575 pixels high and include them with your post and then we can talk about them each rather than just in general.
On my system many of them looked very dark, for some reason, especially on the upper half of the model's body. I downloaded some of the images and ran a histogram on them and they really ARE dark. So my first suggestion is to learn how to set levels. Even then, it looked like the model was not as evenly-lit as you might have intended.
Also, the UI on your Flash website is not intuitively obvious, and the images load slowly, which is typical of Flash. Personally, I don't know why people feel like they need to get all cutesy with animated Flash effects just to show a photo album. It should be about the photography.
(obligatory image image we have to post when critiquing . . . )
and promise me that AFTER asking for HONEST feedback, you wont get angry like SOME people on this site who ask the same but don''t like the replies. they still don't have a clue also but think they're pros now??
i just clicked on a few but i can see in many pixs right off you lack a hair/backgrd light. you HAVE to separate the subject from the backgrd, specially on those with dark hair... otherwise that hair disappears into the backgrd.
secondly, the lighting is NOT correct in two points: the camera and the lights.
you need to have a main and a fill, and what i can see looks like one light with NO main at all. the camera cant read that dim light, thence your dark pixs.
on the pix with the thigh-high boots, there is a hair light (good) but the lighting is off. it's like just a single main though i can see from the shadows you DO have two lights and a (too-high) hair light. while the pix is lighter, you dont have dimension... that's why the main & fill lighting is important. it looks like your main is too much and the fill is the same ratio, therefore no dimension... get a few good books on lighting and that will help you. even looking at some old classic masters' paintings with that beautYful soft light on skin will help.
i work mainly outdoors and keep the same principle for my fotos... look at other's fotos and try to copy it. BUT if you shoot indoors, which looks like what you're doing, you must learn the ratio of main & fill lighting.
PS: i agree: if i see a flash site for fotos, i just move on. photo sites load slowly anyway and cute icons, buttons, silly designs or layered backgrds, along with flash or too much JS distract from the pleasure of the imagery. i discourage flash or fancy sites, and will usually exit stage right quickly. good luck!!!
hell, everyone can get somebody to pose except me!!! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
I am far from getting mad about critiques.....I desperatly need the help as being kinda close, but knowing something is not right is making me mental.
I really need input/critiques as I cannot get over the hump and figure out exactly what I am not doing right....
I believe every shot has a hair light, and some you all will see the flare, which I do like on ocasion, but the suggestion of using a grid/snoot is one I guess I'll have to investigate.....
The worst part is I am using 3 lights, one as an ineffective hair(lol), one camerra left which was supposed to be fill, and one camer right supposed to be a main...
I was using a small softbox on the hair light, and eitherr umbrella's or softboxes for the main and the fill. The ratios of the light are just guesses and I knew they were not right, hence my post trying to figure it out.
I am guessing that the lightmeter I bought, yet have not used might come in handy here to get my ratios right.
What happen most times is I have to set up all the gear then break it down after the shoot, so we usually get right to work shooting, albiet badly....
This weekend I setup in the basement so I can leave the equipment up for a few days and play with figuring out the light meter and the ratios. I have also hit amazon for some new books.
Any specific exercizes/webpages or general help is GREATLY appreciated....
And really *thanks* for the comments/suggestions.
Scott
PS. the flash site was the easiest thing to set up, but I'll see about displaying the photos in a better manner.
IP: 205.238.236.198
Linear Mode
