Kathleen, a portrait

IMO, this lacks facial details. Or is the focal point on the eye's and quickly fades everything else?

I had this developed (no prints) and scanned to CD on a fuji frontier

system at walmart ($6.97!). Looking for comments in general and

expecially for anything you see that could be classified as, "nit

picking". I'm not sure how I feel about this film, (fist time using

it). Please back up a rating 0f 4 or lower with a comment or don't

bother to rate at all.

I like the natural side lighting. And the eyes and hair are crisp and full of detail on my scanner. Enough DOF in mine umble opinion. (my noses and lips never come out surgically sharp for me and I wouldnt want them to) It would probably be a little improved if there were just a mite less reflection,(cool bluish too) coming on to the face from the concrete(?) object. Bluish on faces never works for me,warmer is better I think. Obviously you could play with that in your graphics program. A little shadow ratio on the left might have added some useful modeling to the cheeks, a nitpic. A good face shot,Jim, lots of personality in that young Kathy. Thanks for the opportunity to comment,?(Sorry I have always been boycotting this rating business FYI)..Gerry

Jim, this image has enough detail to qualify as good work. Tilted head and the angle of the lens made the composition very nice. The shade part still looks OK without the need for fill lighting, it adds depth to the head shot. The only adjustment that I probably would do is to crop a little more tighter at the bottom. Personal preference, anyway......

Almost looks like some of the facial details (blemishes and freckles?) have been "softened" out of existence with photo editing.

 

In any case, I actually like the pose and expression, but do think it would be a much stronger photo with more color and detail in the nose, cheeks, and mouth areas.

Michael, I aggree with you about the face. Since I did nothing in photo shop other that add a very slight amount of magenta. Since I did not get prints made with this roll, I do not have a print to look at to compaire to the scan. I plan to have them make a 8x12 of this one and will see then how the facial details look.

 

I think you see the freckles more on the concrete side because of the blue light it adds. A blue filter in B&W would make the reds darker and the blues lighter. The same thing must be happening here. I agree with the others that the DOF is a bit shallow. The focus on the eyes is perfect, but her nose and mouth are on the soft side. Overall, this a simple, but very clean shot. Good job.

Alright, I've never heard of Fuji NPS (is it slide or just print film?) but wheter or not this is slide film you may have purchased this film way out of date... the colors look very washed out (I dont know wheter its my computer or your photo, but ive sure seen some crisp photos with beautiful colors on my computer so I tend to think its your film) I dont know if I like the fact the the eyes are in focus and it softly blurs outwards... to me a crisper all arround shot would have done better justice to this picture... also its very bulls-eyed as most material i see on photo.net is, its not interesting when the subject is always in the perfect center of the screen, try some different composition... especially for faces... the expression also gets me, to me its boring, its one of those blah shots that you see and think, wow that went wrong, I dont mean to discourage you or come across as an asshole... just here to be honest and tell you what I think as best as I possibly can. Improvement needed. Behn

I have paid attention to review's of this professional portrait film and some of those reviews pointed to a lack of coloration in flesh tones. I did not think it would be something I'd notice so much, but I do.

 

www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/Products.jsp?nav=1&parent=PRODUCT_CATEGORY_238448&product=2300108

 

Behn, your not discouraging me at all, your giving me some insite on your opinion. Which I am glad you have done and welcome other's to do as well. After all I'd rather learn something here, than have a client think these things to themselves and not return in the future or not tell a friend about me.

 

I personally like the shot,nps usually has warmer skin tones,I bet the photo is warmer. The focus was on the eyes and dof was on the money as far as i am concerned.You know the subject,what does this photo do for you, thats all that matters. Good Job!

I dont use a scanner so not able to offer much in that area. Overall I like the picture. I dont think I would crop the bottom in that I think the lovely hair adds a lot. Thanks for sharing.

Hi Jim....I have had stunning results with the kodak portra 160VC and 400 VC. Their are a couple of shots in my folder shot with it, "Nadia and Papa" and the colored one in the Alexa folder. It's really a great film for portrait work. excellent skin tones. I am also very satisfied with it as an all around film. Give it a shot....kevin......oops..lol I just looked through your folder and see u use it already..!! Sorry

Lol, kevin. I just finished a roll of Kodak 160NC, We'll see how I feel about it, compaired to Fuji NPS160.

I stumbled upon your folder in a round about way, but I would like to say that I like your whole folder. You're right about the lack of facial detail, but her expression still makes the shot.