mark_harrington1

Look up incidence of reflection....

<p>First, most "models" don't stand a chance in hell of getting a paying job. Obviously this model is a freelancer and/or starting out or she would be working on assignment or the representing agency would arrange the images. Having said that, it is not desirable for a model to submit a portfolio with logos etc to the potential client. Provide the model with a 9X12 finished print for her book and a low-resolution watermarked image for her on-line use. Give her a specific license agreement that dictates use of image for self-promotion only and don't adjust the day rate. She only needs a one copy of each look for her use. You can even just give one copy, but never two of the same set/outfit/style. IF the images are for your own self-promotion, this is a great way to get your name out, if the images are for publication, your contract with the publisher will dictate usage. In either case, you don't have to give her images if she is paid, but it is customary and the best way to develop a professional relationship with the model, with whom future projects may occur.</p>

<p>Pixel count has little to do with image quality. The more pixels there are the larger the native file size from the camera. This means you will be able to enlarge the image more without image degradation. There are many excellent images taken with 6mp cameras. Remember its only the last several years that cameras went beyond 12mp. Dynamic range, noise and proper lens selections are much more important unless you plan on printing billboard size images...</p>

<p>I believe that the average consumer couldn't distinguish between a well composed image taken by an amateur or professional. Having said that, if the amateur does professional level work why does it matter? Being a professional photographer is much more than just using a high quality camera and using the rule of thirds. Its about color harmony, attention to detail, using light to sculpt a subject not just light a subject, proper posing to accentuate or hide aspects of an image. It's a blend of technical expertise, artistic vision and the ability to execute both under pressure. Even the most seasoned photographers are faced with challenging lighting scenarios but knowing how to overcome those challenges and never let them see you sweat is the difference in my opinion. The industry is full of fauxtographers, mamarazis and gwc's all claiming to be pros. Many of these photographers take an insane amount of images in hopes of capturing the one image that speaks to the viewer, which if they take enough, will be there. A well reasoned businessperson learns how to take as few pictures as possible to create that image, this comes from knowing your craft and the best way to learn something is to be dependent upon it for your survival. One of the biggest ways to instantly judge wether a person is a true professional is in how the images are presented. Do you post the images online with a gallery of 500 images or do you bring the client into your studio for a viewing and sales session of 25 (weddings, perhaps 100)? Do you show all 5 images of the the ring exchange or just the one? Are your images fully retouched and ready to order or do you require time to retouch them once they are selected? Do you have a business license, insurance and contracts, or do you just 'wing it'? Questions such as this are what separates a "professional" from someone who sells pictures....</p><div></div>

<p>You will have some dof issues if shooting wide open. Not only will your dof be very shallow at 1.4 but your critical focus will have to be exact. Studio portraiture isn't sports but subject movement can cause oof issues. Also, the main reason aside from the ability to capture in lower light and bokeh is that lenses are sharpest stopped down 1-2 stops from maximum aperture. So if you need maximum sharpness in your subject, you will accomplish that at wider aperture with fast glass than with consumer grade lenses. A 1.4 lens will give you better quality at 2.8 than a 2.8 lens at 2.8 and so on. Most modern DSLR's can yield better results at higher ISO than was typical with film or earlier dslrs, making extremely fast lenses for low light much less important, but still the ability to really create a smooth, buttery bokeh (which is lens dependent) requires an open aperture. If you want a nice portrait lens consider the DC 105 or 135 options which allow you to select your own level of shaprness.</p>

<p>It could well be a composite image, but my guess is that the photographer used a slow shutter speed and had a crystal chain that he slowly swung in front of the lens to create the shoot thru effect you are seeing. Notice how the couple, and background elements behind the crystal are sharp yet the foreground distortion (crystal) shows motion blur? Can't say for sure which because both would be easy to recreate, just need someone to swing a beaded strand of crystals and play with it until you get the right combination that works for you. </p>

Think about it this way, you need one great picture for your portfolio, you don't get that by shooting 1,00 images an hour. Take your time, make sure your lighting, posing and composition is what you want it to be, then click the shutter. If you pay attention to all the details and follow the stuff the teachers are telling you, you should be able to get the shot in one try, unless there's a blink or some other distraction. An effective tool is to use a tripod so you can more accurately see what other elements are in play and you can just concentrate on the details, clicking the shutter when the moment is right<div></div>

To be clear, my reason for posting the image - which I fully acknowldege and intentionally selected - was to post an image where photographers of all skill levels could find something in the image to relate to from their own shoots. I chose this image because it had many good qualities and some areas that were not ideal (perspective, negative space and crop for example). But the image also has some good elements and is typical of many wedding scenes. I wanted this image to be discussed and used as a tool to help emerging photographers see what the more experienced photographers see as good points and bad points about the image. This is the way that I'm used to critiquing and recieving feedback. Every image has good and bad in them, even sealed images. A one or two sentance critque is not only unfair to the image maker, it offers no opportunity for others to learn from. Editorial comments like an image isn't professional is not only discouraging to others who may not do work at this level but insulting. I have the knowledge to find good and bad points in virtually any image a person may choose to post, but I always find something positive to comment on, or at least offer some suggestions for making the next image more effective. Through all of this I was just trying to breathe some life into this forum and to open a constructive conversation in hopes of encouraging others to join in. Image critiques can be hard on the ego, which is more than acceptable so long as the critiques do not come across without reasoning or explanation. I make a challenge to those who feel my images are not professional to post an image from their last wedding. I will use all of my knowledge and experience to offer a professional critique. I promise to back it up with well documented professional standards (i.e. Compliance with acceptable skin tone ranges, appropriate focal length of lens, appropriate lighting for the subjects, proper light patterns and a few other technical and artistic evaluations). This would not only help others understand the skill level of the submitter but it will also increase the activity level of this forum. In an open forum like this, there is no way to know ther validity of a crtiquer's comments. Anyone can state a level of expertise and perhaps they have it but how do others know? Lack of images in a person's portfolio speaks volumes. I have and will provide the credentials to make qualified critiques so there is no doubt to the basis of my observations. After seeing more than one thread lamenting the demise of this forum I wanted to help bring some activity back so that others can get involved as well, its that simple. I haven't been active in this forum for years but I cared enough to put myself out there, now its time for the regulars to contribute as well.

<p>Bob, I have no issue with your suggestion to use a ladder, I often carry a small step ladder with me along with a collapsable wagon for my gear. This image was taken at a golf course and it was quite a walk from the clubhouse, not making excuses, but it really was a last minute must have request and we were out of time. <br> Best regards, my issues were not yours.</p>

Another crop to consider.<div></div>

There is very little variety in your shots, same basic point of view, same distant unconnected upward facial view keeps us from making a connection. Your strongest image is the last one in the greenhouse. If she had better facial posing it would have been a definate keeper. The remainder of the greenhouse images are too centered, too much depth of field and you need to pay more attention to the background elements that appear to grow out of the subjects head. Look into Rule of Thirds for subject placement and your images will instantly improve if followed. Shoot both portrait and landscape for versatility. Your exposures are dead on but too much dof. Good color balance shifting a bit to yellow but acceptable on my iPad. Most look like you were close but hampered by basic rules broken but without a reason.<div></div>

Another thought, its not just the location, its how the model interacts with the location. Take the image by the broken window, instead of a basic glamour pose (straight arm should have been bent) turning the model's face into the light for a 2/3rds view which would give you a short light pattern (good for women :)) and putting the left hand on the top of the window or lightly on the window pane and the lower hand doing the same with the bottom of the window you can ask the model to give you a forelone look, then an insecure expression, a sense of anticipation as if she's waiting for a secret lover or have her cast her gaze down and sensually stroke the side of her body to be lost in a fantasy, and many more looks and feels from the same location, minor adjustments but the same basic pose to yield 4 or more unique looks in about one minute.

My opinion is the cropping is not right on any of the images. The one that comes closest is the 2nd image. I like the black and whit treatment but you could also apply a grunge texture. Your camera angle is a bit low and the cadt shadow on her face is very distracting and detracts from the image. The first image really just doesnt work for me but with a tighter crop may improve. The crop on the third image is showing too many competing elements. For a tighter shot like this just the hint of the decay may have more impact, or go all the way and show the full body in its surroundings. I feel your disappointment, thinking you have this great location only to review the images and find they just dont look like you hoped. These environments are challenging but other factors working against you are poor posing, uncontrolled lighting, blown highlights and lack of an easy to see main subject or point of intrest. I think that with proper cropping and processing you can improve the images but they still fall short with exposure, light control, posing and impact. Sorry its a bit harsh of a technique but you are on the right path by admitting the images need improvement. You'r next shoot will be better as you keep in mind some of the tips you are getting. I cropped the third image to show you how less is sometimes more.<div></div>