petert531 Posted January 7, 2007 Share #1 Posted January 7, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) A very nice young lady. Picture in jeans is how she walked in (OK with some makeup added) then a quick fashion piece and then the 'Barbie' shoot. No touch ups. THis was last eveining and I just managed to do picks for this. Anyway my PS skills are not going to make a big diff...well the barbie story I will probably wipe her skin with blur...'Barbie Skin' LOL. Being the maniac I am, the lighting is different in all three, but the same withinin the story...classic beauty lighing. Others are a form of side lighting, my current favourite. Thanks for looking. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 Hi petert531, Take a look here Julie . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stuny Posted January 7, 2007 Share #2 Posted January 7, 2007 Peter - In #1 her right arm is in repose, but there is still definition of her shoulder cap, a very nice touch which shows because of the lighting you chose. However, below her right eye and to the right of her mouth there is need for either PS or a bit more, broad light on her face. Number 2 works better for me, and either the front lighting or the hat position negates the need for PS. Of the two non-Barbies I prefer the second for the better focus on the face. With the Barbie series, Julie has some asymmetry to her chin, and the 1st & 3rd show it. I suppose this is hidden in the last by the angle and the tilt. With Julie I think you need to be careful to avoid that particular facial flaw. The lighting is gorgeous on that series of 5. However, 1 & 5 need PS under the right eye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petert531 Posted January 7, 2007 Author Share #3 Posted January 7, 2007 Indeed in the 'PS enhanced 21st century I will have a fair amount of work ahead of me'. All I can say is the transformation of commercial images from capture to publication is scary. I have many 'sexier'/engaging images from series 1' , but I wanted to show Julie as the teenage that she is and am just to far backlogged to correct anything. I treat image capture as the key element...too many years of film...but I know darkroom whether tradidtional or digital polishes the image from good to great. Indeed faces, when you get in tight are terribly difficult to photograph. I stare in marvel of the cosmetic ads time and time again...in sheer amazement. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted January 7, 2007 Share #4 Posted January 7, 2007 I've never done fashion shots perhaps because I wouldn't put that kind of make-up on such a pretty face (actually it's not something I'm drawn to) but I really do like the ligting of that first very natural shot. Cheers, Wilfredo+ Benitez-Rivera Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petert531 Posted January 8, 2007 Author Share #5 Posted January 8, 2007 Sure the barbie makeup is over the top (wait til I PS her skin to a blur!), but in front of strobes, especially with digital, without makeup you are in for a world of pain...Put a 30 year old woman in that position on a paid gig and you won't get paid. Digital's accutance makes it appear so sharp that every little bit is there. At a fashion shoot the makeup artist is probably more important than the photographer in many respects. It's a team effort and that's one of the things that makes it hard (project management!) and satisfying. It's not random chance. Pictures are made/manufactured. Nothing happens by waiting. WHen I first started doing this, I just waited, I thought the model would do something. Some will, most just stand there. It's scary, especially in front of a white/grey/black wall. If you put somebody in a forest you start with 50% of the picture. Put them on a blank canvas, no have a go...Yikes. I live in fear of failure every time out. I guess it's a bit like working for a newspaper, when you get sent out you can't say ...sorry no pix, nothing to report, you HAVE to come home with something. In the studio/fashion case you gotta go MAKE something happen. I encourage ALL to try some form of this. YOu will get an appreciation for light like never before (hard light, soft light, stuff in between, multiple lights...) posing (nobody will critique you for a street pose) then when you get back to reportage you will SEE entirely differently, things you didn't know about. It's great. How could anyone ever tire of photography, the art of seeing. LIke the Leica tag says...if you can see you can photography, but learning to see takes a lifetime... or something like that anyway Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmr Posted January 8, 2007 Share #6 Posted January 8, 2007 Peter, I find your shots and the stories around their creation fascinating. It's not a type of photography of which I have any experience, so it's interesting to read what you and Stuart see in them, which I would probably miss. Thanks for posting this series and the others too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petert531 Posted January 8, 2007 Author Share #7 Posted January 8, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks for looking at what I do. I post here because it is not that common for people to do this work and remain amateur... Here is a different view of Julie with Jeans and T-shirt. Simple lighting allows for much creativity. A single, essentially sidelight, gives lots of room to play. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arminw Posted January 8, 2007 Share #8 Posted January 8, 2007 Impressive lighting .. I like it very much and the girl looks very comfortable, which makes it a nice picture Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lykoudos Posted January 8, 2007 Share #9 Posted January 8, 2007 Hello Peter, Beautiful and photographs brilliant in the motive. Authentically in the expression. Reservedly in gesturing and body language: Congratulate. Greeting Wolfgang Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elansprint72 Posted January 8, 2007 Share #10 Posted January 8, 2007 I'm with Wilfredo on this, #1 is the best, the rest look, somehow, contrived. Cheers, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.