petert531 Posted February 8, 2007 Share #1 Posted February 8, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) First Bathing suit shot for me. I think this lighting works well here-it caputres a certain mood and has worked 3 out 3 times for me! Madison was really nice and her mom super cool. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 8, 2007 Posted February 8, 2007 Hi petert531, Take a look here Madison . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stuny Posted February 8, 2007 Share #2 Posted February 8, 2007 The brightness and angle of the main light suggests late morning or early afternoon by a wall at the beach, and the moussed hair suggests her recently coming back to shore. Do mothers frequetly accompany their daughters to your studio? How old is Madison? When will we see your other two successes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petert531 Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share #3 Posted February 8, 2007 Madison is only 15. I always welcome mothers (sometimes fathers) with Kids so young. Good to know they care enough. Then there is no question later about the clothes. Parents help make the call along with the model whether they are comfortable or not. I usually try to get clearance from the agent as well. There is too much room for 'abuse' and I make sure never to be alone with a model. A female artist of guardian must be present at all times, even with models 'of age'. That way I stay out of false accusations. Lighting: The same lighting has been presented here on this board in my temptation story and Rheanne. It does pretty much look like fake sunlight and I love it-but it is only for good tight skin. It's simply a single light, high up pointed down with a 90 degree reflector and low power setting-direct light, not diffuse in any way. THe light recycles in about .2s and is ready to go encouraging quick bursts. I find low power settings yield a much diferent look than more light and stopping down. Light is an absolute mystery to me still. I struggle like hell, but I have to say having a digi camera has cut the learning curve. I do a basic meter (unless it's a known setup) and then just move lights til I am happy- or give up! Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lykoudos Posted February 8, 2007 Share #4 Posted February 8, 2007 Hello Peter. Elegantly, expression-strongly in completed aesthetics and Choreographie. Kind regards Wolfgang Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_parker Posted February 8, 2007 Share #5 Posted February 8, 2007 Peter Not 100% sure about the creases in the suit but pose, facial expression and lighting work nicely for me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted February 8, 2007 Share #6 Posted February 8, 2007 Madison lookd much older that 15, probably due to her very low % of body fat, making her facial bone structure show so well -- Unless the models are quite thin like this, women generally still have a baby fat puffiness to their faces at this age and even for another five to ten years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petert531 Posted February 9, 2007 Author Share #7 Posted February 9, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) There is no touch up here at all. Reduction of the rib lines and wrinkes to come. WHen you shoot a lot, it's hard to catch up on the touch ups. THis is the joy of candid photography, nobody EXPECTS that. WIth this sort of work it is de rigeur. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kodaktrix Posted February 9, 2007 Share #8 Posted February 9, 2007 Peter, there are some things I do not like about that shot: - The swim suit does not fit. It is too long for her body so it does extremely crease - The folds on the suit are underlined by the folds on her skin. She could have streched her body a little to avoid the skin folds and avoid some of the suit folds and still have her left hand on the hip. This would have been a very strenuous pose for her but modelling is hard work anyway. - Although she is that slim the belly above the pubic bone is soft and not worked out, the light from slightly in front and above models that zone very uncomfortable. A light strictly horizontal from the side would not only hide that but also the skin folds on her chest. - The intensive pink of the suit dominates two thirds of the picture, but makes her face extremely pale and colourless. A lipstick in the colour of the suit would have given a better balance over the whole picture and would lead the viewers glance to her face. - the skin on her right elbow looks dry and not smooth. Applying some rich cream to those often dry skin areas before the shooting does prevent that. Regards Oliver Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petert531 Posted February 9, 2007 Author Share #9 Posted February 9, 2007 The folds, I agree. I have better pix with the suit fitting, but I liked the attitude here. On low budget shoots (ie $0) there is limited choice of clothing. No stylist means I have too much to watch as well. I know defensive sounding stuff! The colouration....this is what I was going for, matter of personal preferance. High contrast look-skin vs colour. No PS on anything yet. I defy anyone to shoot digi without cleanup...just part of the process, and I didn't have time. You should see what the ads look like before cleanup. Yikes. It's not like the old days. But you are spot on, I need to be a little more critical on this and I will repeat it tonight, so Thanks! Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.