Photo Session Review

[tnbandmom]

This past weekend my daughter and a friend were gracious enough to give my

husband and I some practice time at a location some people had been talking

about. These shots were taken at a cemetary. It had such great backgrounds that

I plan on doing engagement sessions and senior sessions here. This was the

first time doing some portraits with the 85 1.8. All the pics with img_ were

taken with the 85 1.8 or 70-200 4.0. I would appreciate any feedback technical

or on image choice. I am planning to make this my "senior portfolio" on my

website. There's a couple of images that are the same but with different

affects. I haven't decided which of these I like the best and there are a

couple of 'cheese' ones that my subjects are in color and the background in bw

because my daughter saw that on one of her friends and just thought it was the

coolest so she had to have it.

 

http://www.osborn-photography.com/galleries/christyjessica/

 

Thank you so much for you time and any feedback.

 

Cindy

[edsel_adams]

Those backgrounds may be "great" in person, but they add little to these photos. You have to watch objects protruding from people's heads, and bright patches that lead the eye away from the face/eyes.

 

 

Also your lighting is bright overhead sunlight in many shots. This causes disturbing shadows, and does little to flatter the subjects. Try adding reflected or flash fill.

 

 

 

Next issue you have to work on posing skills. People look best, and thinner when angled slightly to the camera. Only a DMV photo or a mug shot should have right & left shoulders. A portrait should have front & rear shoulders.

[elnoralouisa]

I like them, my only thought about what Edsel said is maybe the second one across with the tree. I do need to warn you though, about doing pictures in the cemetery. I LOVE cemeteries, and love to take pictures there. I put some on smugmug recently, and some people were just absolutely horrified that I would go into a cemetery. I was at one the other day that would be great for pics, a lot of archways, but I know I can't ask just anyone to go there with me. So, just go you know you might get some strange reactions if you ask them to go to a cemetery. (you can invite me, I love them!)

[10tenphoto]

I think the pictures look very nice for the most part. It seems that you like to shoot pretty tight. I would suggest trying some wider angles. The backgrounds probably have more potential than your pictures show. The location seems like a good spot, you just need to learn how to use it to your advantage.

 

Also, I agree that you need to be aware of your lighting and subject positioning. That only gets better with lots of practice. Search some photographers sites to get some ideas on posing and lighting. Don't be afraid to experiment with new poses and ideas. You can never learn too much.

[eric v]

I agree with above posts. I really like IMG_9663.jpg - this image has really nice light (and composition and posing). I am guessing there was a large concrete parking lot/road, or wall behind you that was reflecting light on to the subject. This look is very nice and could be duplicated with some consistency using a reflector. In some of the ones where you did use fill-flash, the backgrounds looked a little blown out. This can be a nice technique at times (like when using back-lit fall foliage as your backdrop) but it doesn't really work here. You lose the nice green color. In this case, the tones of the subject and b'ground can be more similar since the depth of field will focus the attention on the subject.

 

That was very nice of your daughter and her friend to pose for you. I know it can be tough to find guinea pigs, I mean volunteers.

[suzanne carey]

I love that place! My husband's sister and her family lived in that area and we went there to take pictures there one day. It was so hot that day I remember and very humid. That place really has lots of potential. I know the thought of taking a picture in a graveyard sounds strange, but this one is great.

 

http://www.pumpkinpatchphoto.com/children/index.html Starting with the 8th picture of my 3 nephews you can get an idea of how pretty it is there.

 

I think your pictures are looking good. I would use a little fill flash in the shade. Going near the end of the day is a great time for pictures b/c the lighting is so soft. I like to use Gary Fong's Lightsphere sometimes too and that makes for nice lighting.

 

Thanks for sharing!

 

Suzanne

[tnbandmom]

Thanks for the comments. Yeah I knew it wasn't the best time of the day. Our plan was to just check out the place because several people kept saying go there. I was pretty shocked about taking pics in a cemetary too. So finally we said we would check it out. Originally we were just going to check it and work on some aperature and fill flash stuff. Then my daughter decided to go and her friend. I hated that the time of the day was really wrong since they were agreeable but figured worth the practice. And these are pretty tightly cropped because that was what I was specifically working on. Guess I should have mentioned that. I struggle with the cropping too tightly vs there's too much space. And I was specifically working with the specific lens.

 

Yeah Suzanne it is normally extremely hot and humid here. Outside weddings are very slim here. Even when we have planned to do outside shots at the weddings the brides will have multiple locations planned. I always make them choose the one spot that they most want because most likely the day of they are going to decide it's too hot for it.

[rene gm]

I would like to add that you should decide what you like and what you do not like. Me, I liked 9721 because of the nice scene, and did not like 9663 because of flat light. I did not like the bright backgrounds on some pictures. But decide yourself. You obviously have the potential to do so.

[will king]

Cindy, I hope I don't come across as rude but these photos are not great. The lighting is either harsh or dull and the backgrounds are a bit distracting. I would practice again but shoot at the golden hour with a reflector.

[mike_barrett2]

I have to agree with Will. Not great. Photoshop can help some but if you learn the technical skills to be a photographer, photoshop will be for enhancement, not repair. Boosting the contrast on the flat ones helps. Here is an example.

 

Mike<div></div>

[will king]

Mike, is absolutely right. Take a good photo and enhance it with photoshop. I also agree with Mike on the flatness of the photos. A quick curves or levels adjustment can be the remedy. Check out some books and videos that may help. Photoshop CS2 for Digital Photographers is a great book by Scott Kelby.

[tnbandmom]

Thanks guys. I do have that book and do have Photoshop. But I only want to use it for enhancement. So I only did a few of the images in Photoshop for that reason. The other test that I was working on was handling the harsh light too. Guess I didn't do an adequate job in that area. I do like the contrast you added to the one image. Sometimes when I've done the curves or contrast adjustment in the past I didn't like it because I didn't get the right mix.

 

Thanks for all the comments.

[William Michael]

Unfortunately, the photographer did not choose the correct time of day for this session, and thus was left to work in difficult lighting, or worse: difficult shadow, and further presented with this problem did not know how to overcome it or did not have the equipment to do so or both.

 

The photographer did not exploit the DoF on the fast 85mm lens, or it seems when it was exploited, or attempted, has created large and distracting highlighted backgrounds.

 

On the whole, it appears that the photographer went to this location without a clear plan, and once there had little control over the pose, lighting, and aperture control.

 

It is evident from two images on the bio page (FL bride and H&S young boy), that an understanding of subject pose and the importance of lighting are not beyond grasp; but such techniques have clearly not been applied during the session at the cemetery, which seems, was a jaunt to see the venue rather than a serious portrait endeavour focussed on the subjects.

 

That is my impersonal and professional critique.

 

To correct I suggest:

 

Plan the time of day / know the lighting.

 

Understand fully the theory of flash fill, and the use of reflectors / diffusers and practice using these.

 

Practice backlighting and flash fill outdoors.

 

Understand the use of DoF (Depth of Field) for portraiture and how to exploit this apropos a fast portrait lens.

 

Pose: Outside might mean casual, it does not mean the photographer is not in control of the pose: e.g. it is very rare that any great portrait image would have front on kneecaps to the viewer. Poor poses can not easily be fixed post production.

 

Viewpoint: when one looks through the viewfinder that is the only world one must see everything in the image, not just the subject, but the background too, and how it reinforces the subject or detracts from it: e.g. there are very few great portraits with `things` growing out of the subjects head.

 

And whilst we touch on that point, there is too much emphasis placed on post production: get it right in camera; the rest will look after itself.

 

WW

[tnbandmom]

William is right on his summary of some of it. It was a check it out and see. Working with the depth of field of the two lenses is exactly what my main focus was. Sometimes my daughter was way to flighty for me to keep testing. The focus right now is working on the depth of field and working only with one or two lenses right now to fully figure out how I like them and working with them. I never said or thought any of these were great. I do love the 85 1.8 and am trying to get more efficient with it. I did have the reflectors with me in the truck but didn't pull them out. I know shame on me.

 

Yes we are planning a return visit this weekend if the rain stays away. And yes I will be pulling the reflectors out. But I still am only working on exploiting the DOF.

 

Thanks for the pointers.

[William Michael]

> I never said or thought any of these were great. <

 

Agree 100%, and I did not assume that: critique is fulsome, or not at all, everything is interlinked.

 

That is simply the point, no more, no less.

 

Re the 85mmF1.8: I use one on a Canon 2oD: for tight head to 3/4 shots I would look at the range f/2 to f/2.4 and run some test shots. The DoF is small but manageable. You might want to use the reflector at the front and the sun to get hair highlights on the top back shadow side of the head for good modelling.

 

I think the 70 to 200 F4 is going to be more limited in this regard and you probably will get better results at full zoom or thereabouts, and I would try F5.6 as a starter, you also might want to select the background more critically than the previous, and ensure it is far enough away from the subject to ensure it is OoF.

 

Certainly I would also attempt very tight shots with zoom at 200mm, and experiment with viewpoint angles, perhaps slightly from above with the subject looking slightly upward. Backlit profiles are interesting also at this focal length.

 

Regards

 

WW

[ni_gentry]

I'm sorry, but the gallery is not good. <p>

There's a lot of problems I see from the lighting, posing, poor exposures, lack of knowledge about using fill-flash, poor post-processing (or lack of), bad color, redundant photos(lack of editing), lack of creativity & variety, etc.<p> I wouldn't use more than a few of these shots on your actual website. Just being honest.

[wedding-photography-denver]

Fill flash at -1ev to -2ev would be helpful.