mascarenhas
Established
Wayne R. Scott said:
Wayne, I like the way the model is lit (except for the plastic sheen on the right of its neck), and the colors, but I think the photo would benefit from shorter dof, and a darker background (maybe burning it in), which would remove the distracting column to the left and separate the left of the model's face from the background. Deeper shadows in the right may remove the plastic look and make the model look more real, which is what I think you were trying to achieve, right?
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
Ampguy- I like the pose and the dof in this photo. This is more portrait-like in nature than some of the snap shots I have been seeing posted as portraits. I would crop some off the top of the photo, but all in all this is nicely done.
Mascarenhas- You have placed your subject nicely on the right 1/3 of the photo. But I am being distracted by the large black object in the left side of the photo. At first glance I thought it was a tree, but now I think it may be the base of a naval gun. I would do a vertical crop of just the girl for portrait photo. Also the crop at the bottom of the photo is very close to her knees. I would suggest not cropping a human body at a joint, like the ankle, knee, elbow etc. Try to crop mid-way between joints.
Ausdlk- I think you have captured a great candid portrait here. The expressions on both of your fellow photographers is just great. I feel like I would like to meet both of these friendly people and share a drink with them, even if they do shoot with Leica’s
.
Raid- I like this photo as a street shot, but for me it doesn’t cut it as a portrait. There are too many competing elements in the photo to be a portrait in my estimation. The use of the man in the red sweatshirt does draw attention to him though. I think he should have been singled out more with a closer camera position with maybe the band out of focus in the back ground. How is that for 20/20 hind sight from an armchair photographer?
Wayne
Mascarenhas- You have placed your subject nicely on the right 1/3 of the photo. But I am being distracted by the large black object in the left side of the photo. At first glance I thought it was a tree, but now I think it may be the base of a naval gun. I would do a vertical crop of just the girl for portrait photo. Also the crop at the bottom of the photo is very close to her knees. I would suggest not cropping a human body at a joint, like the ankle, knee, elbow etc. Try to crop mid-way between joints.
Ausdlk- I think you have captured a great candid portrait here. The expressions on both of your fellow photographers is just great. I feel like I would like to meet both of these friendly people and share a drink with them, even if they do shoot with Leica’s
.Raid- I like this photo as a street shot, but for me it doesn’t cut it as a portrait. There are too many competing elements in the photo to be a portrait in my estimation. The use of the man in the red sweatshirt does draw attention to him though. I think he should have been singled out more with a closer camera position with maybe the band out of focus in the back ground. How is that for 20/20 hind sight from an armchair photographer?
Wayne
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
A few words about my "portrait". Raid and I are having a 50mm comparison shoot out, so I have been walking about shooting with a 50mm lens attached to my camera body. I walked into our local Goodwill and saw the "model" in the window. I was immediately struck by the quality of light and the shadows on her face. Since I was only carrying a 50mm lens I decided to shoot showing the light source and the model. (Leica M2, with Canon 50mm f1.8 @f5.6 and 1/125 sec. on Kodak Gold 200.)
Many of the posted portraits I view are poorly lighted in my opinion. This model is lit by a large north facing window which gives a soft light that wraps around her face with no hard edged shadow. She is short lighted meaning that the short side of her face (as viewed from camera position) is being hit by the main light. Some of the main light is spilling over to her left check bone in a classic triangular highlight pattern while the rest of the "broad portion" of her face goes into shadow giving a 3-D look to her face. There is secondary light bouncing off of the grey sidewalk providing highlights in her eyes.
The photo I provided as scanned by the 1 hour photo lab. They just average the values and print away. As my statistic professor in college told me once, "If you have one bare foot in a bonfire and the other bare foot resting on a block of dry ice and average the temperatures you should be reasonabley comfortable."
I played with the photo for a couple of minutes in photoshop to give an idea of what I saw in my mind's eye when I thook this photo. Ideally I would have used an 85mm to 105mm lens on a real model. If this were for a client I would put a lot more effort into the retouching.
Here it is for what it is worth:
Wayne
Many of the posted portraits I view are poorly lighted in my opinion. This model is lit by a large north facing window which gives a soft light that wraps around her face with no hard edged shadow. She is short lighted meaning that the short side of her face (as viewed from camera position) is being hit by the main light. Some of the main light is spilling over to her left check bone in a classic triangular highlight pattern while the rest of the "broad portion" of her face goes into shadow giving a 3-D look to her face. There is secondary light bouncing off of the grey sidewalk providing highlights in her eyes.
The photo I provided as scanned by the 1 hour photo lab. They just average the values and print away. As my statistic professor in college told me once, "If you have one bare foot in a bonfire and the other bare foot resting on a block of dry ice and average the temperatures you should be reasonabley comfortable."
I played with the photo for a couple of minutes in photoshop to give an idea of what I saw in my mind's eye when I thook this photo. Ideally I would have used an 85mm to 105mm lens on a real model. If this were for a client I would put a lot more effort into the retouching.
Here it is for what it is worth:
Wayne
Last edited:
ampguy
Veteran
critiques
critiques
Mascarenhas -- woman reading note
I like this very much. The hair in the face shows some wind, and the placement of the subject wrt the big left black object, and lake or ocean in the background is very nice. For some reason the subject looks like Jackie O. to me at first. Where was this taken?
ausdlk -- Andrew & Victoria
Wow, this is almost perfect to me. The facial expressions are genuine and affectionate. Nice cameras! and very good focus on the faces. Very nice to have the white chair behind the man's RF for contrast. The watch dial on the lady looks large, but interesting. I wonder if this would have also worked with a slightly wider view showing more of the room? Excellent!
Raid -- New Orleans
Very good street shot. The expression on the man's face is priceless -- he's eyeing you wondering what you're doin' with that camera. The band behind looks good. The person's feet and front behind the guy in the brown jacket are a tad distracting. I might try cropping that person out.
Wayne R. - mannekin
Incredible colors and contrast on the dress, and detail on the hat and face. I like how it shows no R arm and generally like the left background, though the reflections just above the shoulder are a little distracting. Looks lifelike. Great job!
critiques
Mascarenhas -- woman reading note
I like this very much. The hair in the face shows some wind, and the placement of the subject wrt the big left black object, and lake or ocean in the background is very nice. For some reason the subject looks like Jackie O. to me at first. Where was this taken?
ausdlk -- Andrew & Victoria
Wow, this is almost perfect to me. The facial expressions are genuine and affectionate. Nice cameras! and very good focus on the faces. Very nice to have the white chair behind the man's RF for contrast. The watch dial on the lady looks large, but interesting. I wonder if this would have also worked with a slightly wider view showing more of the room? Excellent!
Raid -- New Orleans
Very good street shot. The expression on the man's face is priceless -- he's eyeing you wondering what you're doin' with that camera. The band behind looks good. The person's feet and front behind the guy in the brown jacket are a tad distracting. I might try cropping that person out.
Wayne R. - mannekin
Incredible colors and contrast on the dress, and detail on the hat and face. I like how it shows no R arm and generally like the left background, though the reflections just above the shoulder are a little distracting. Looks lifelike. Great job!
raid
Dad Photographer
My photo is actually a street shot and not a real portrait as many would define it. I don't think that the man [in red] was happy about having me take his photo. The street musicians are a part of the New Orleans scene.
Raid
Raid
mascarenhas
Established
The photo was took outside a very old (eighteenth century, maybe seventeenth) fort at Salvador, Brazil. It is not a classical portrait, by far (and trying to take one with a 40mm lens wouldn't be very flattering, I think ), but I liked the setting. About the hair, I have another shot without the hair, but the expression in this one is better. Thanks for all the comments! I will rescan the negative and experiment with your suggestions.
), but I liked the setting. About the hair, I have another shot without the hair, but the expression in this one is better. Thanks for all the comments! I will rescan the negative and experiment with your suggestions.
AusDLK
Famous Photographer
Hey all.
I guess I'm curious why so many self-proclaimed non-portraits were posted for critique under the heading of Portraits?
That seems counter-productive and leaves one open for possibly unnecessary criticism -- for example, some of my (negative) constructive comments were based on the fact that the image did not work as a true "portrait".
I toyed with the idea of posting a image that was also a marginal portrait but decided to leave that one for an open category and went with the one you've seen.
I guess I'm curious why so many self-proclaimed non-portraits were posted for critique under the heading of Portraits?
That seems counter-productive and leaves one open for possibly unnecessary criticism -- for example, some of my (negative) constructive comments were based on the fact that the image did not work as a true "portrait".
I toyed with the idea of posting a image that was also a marginal portrait but decided to leave that one for an open category and went with the one you've seen.
raid
Dad Photographer
Sometimes it is better to keep a category more open to other interpretations. I one had a landscape image that someone complained about as not being a "true landscape", but then he came back and acknowledged that a landscape can cover such an image.
Raid
Raid
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
mascarenhas said:Raid, crazy colors! What film is this, does the chrome actually look like this?
Fabio: I used to use almost exclusively Fujichrome 50 (non Velvia) and Fujichrome 100, so the slide is one of these two types of chrome. Yes, the slide looks just like this.I have been taking photos for many years,and my typical instructions to the photo lab when asking for a print from a slide is "I want a print as closely matched as possible to how the slide looks on a light table". I had to quickly take this street scene photo and move on. I think of it as a "street portrait".
Raid
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
ausdlk,
I don't feel that your comments were negative. I think these critiques should be learning exercises, not fawning sessions telling someone how great the photo is or is not.
I do wonder what the perception of a portrait is to most people on this forum. Personally I like to put up a photo that is less than perfect (very easy for me to do by the way) to see what the comments will be. Normally I have my idea of what needs to be done differently to make the photo better, I enjoy hearing other people's opinion on what should be done to see if my ideas are close to theirs.
Hopefully I will learn from these threads, and I hope that others reading these will gain some knowledge.
Wayne
I don't feel that your comments were negative. I think these critiques should be learning exercises, not fawning sessions telling someone how great the photo is or is not.
I do wonder what the perception of a portrait is to most people on this forum. Personally I like to put up a photo that is less than perfect (very easy for me to do by the way) to see what the comments will be. Normally I have my idea of what needs to be done differently to make the photo better, I enjoy hearing other people's opinion on what should be done to see if my ideas are close to theirs.
Hopefully I will learn from these threads, and I hope that others reading these will gain some knowledge.
Wayne
ampguy
Veteran
a guess
a guess
My guess is that some of us are still learning the category descriptions and definitions. We could benefit from you when reviewing our stuff as in your first line saying something like:
"This is a Portrait theme critique, and your photo is more appropriate to the xyz theme" Then just critique as normal.
where xyz is "open" "landscape" "street", etc.
Thanks.
a guess
My guess is that some of us are still learning the category descriptions and definitions. We could benefit from you when reviewing our stuff as in your first line saying something like:
"This is a Portrait theme critique, and your photo is more appropriate to the xyz theme" Then just critique as normal.
where xyz is "open" "landscape" "street", etc.
Thanks.
ausdlk said:
raid
Dad Photographer
The main purpose of such critique sessions is to expose photographers to other views. Being open minded is very important here. I have hundreds of traditional portraits of my kids, as you may know, but I chose a street portrait. There are some who will insist that only a "staged" portrait is a true portait (in a studio setting), which would make each of the posted images invalid as portraits.
Raid
Raid
AusDLK
Famous Photographer
My Leica Couple portrait was taken at a coffeeshop in downtown Prague practically next door to the Foto Skoda camera store.
I will always stop a Leica user when I see one. I was very surprised to see them both sporting an M -- an M7 for Andre and an MP for Victoria. Victoria is fond of the f/1 Noctilux which I had a first time opportunity to play with when I met up with them another time.
I used my R-D1 for this photograph using a 21mm Elmarit.
They are very nice folks and I look forward to seeing them again on future visits.
I will always stop a Leica user when I see one. I was very surprised to see them both sporting an M -- an M7 for Andre and an MP for Victoria. Victoria is fond of the f/1 Noctilux which I had a first time opportunity to play with when I met up with them another time.
I used my R-D1 for this photograph using a 21mm Elmarit.
They are very nice folks and I look forward to seeing them again on future visits.
Last edited:
AusDLK
Famous Photographer
My "rejected" portrait
My "rejected" portrait
I wrote previously about what may or may not be considered a "portrait" and why images that might be questionable portraits where submitted for critique in this thread.
I wrote that I censored myself and submitted the Leica Couple over my first choice -- because I did not myself consider it to be portrait-enough according to my interpretation.
For fun, I have attached my rejected image. I call it What A Dish. This one makes me smile.
Is a photograph of a portrait itself a portrait? That's what I asked myself.
Anyway, I played it safe.
Thoughts from the thread?
My "rejected" portrait
I wrote previously about what may or may not be considered a "portrait" and why images that might be questionable portraits where submitted for critique in this thread.
I wrote that I censored myself and submitted the Leica Couple over my first choice -- because I did not myself consider it to be portrait-enough according to my interpretation.
For fun, I have attached my rejected image. I call it What A Dish. This one makes me smile.
Is a photograph of a portrait itself a portrait? That's what I asked myself.
Anyway, I played it safe.
Thoughts from the thread?
