# Full Body Ella, Angel vs Devil - Tips?



## DGMPhotography (May 11, 2013)

Hello! So today I did a themed shoot of angel vs devil with Ella. We tried some different stuff, but the main change from our last shoot was that almost all of our shots were full body shots, not close-ups of the face. I was hoping I could get some advice and feedback about the results! 

1.
2. 3.4.5.

1 I think turned out pretty nice. When I showed her though she didn't like it saying she was self conscious about her neck?
2 I really like. 
3 I really like.
4 is going to be photoshopped so there's a glowing ball of light in her hands.
5 needs to be fixed since I accidentally got rid of the white dress version's shadow (just pretend it's there).

There's also this one: 

The idea behind it was kinda "tango with the devil" but meh... there's a reason I'm the photographer and not the model.

In all of these I know I could have greatly benefited from a shallower dof. Trust me, if I could have I would have. I'm getting closer to that 50mm f/1.8 everyday! Please share some comments on these though, I'd greatly appreciate it!

Thanks!


----------



## sarah_19_nz (May 11, 2013)

I really like image #2. # 3 is cute but it looks a little soft?. Image #4 would be better if the background wasn't so distracting...perhaps clone out that golf cart or whatever the thing with wheels is??... also would be better if the bottom half of her face was showing more? The others just aren't doing it for me personally.


----------



## Vtec44 (May 11, 2013)

Most of these were shot at a high angle, which shorten her legs and exaggerates her head.  It looks like the sun was still out and strong, based on the shadows.  I'd pick a better time to shoot next time.  Some of these were shot at f11, f4 1/80... so random.

I'm not a pro but those are just my observations.


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 11, 2013)

sarah_19_nz said:


> I really like image #2. # 3 is cute but it looks a little soft?. Image #4 would be better if the background wasn't so distracting...perhaps clone out that golf cart or whatever the thing with wheels is??... also would be better if the bottom half of her face was showing more? The others just aren't doing it for me personally.



Yeah, that's what I was saying about dof, especially with #4. Why don't you like #1? 



Vtec44 said:


> Most of these were shot at a high angle, which  shorten her legs and exaggerates her head.  It looks like the sun was  still out and strong, based on the shadows.  I'd pick a better time to  shoot next time.  Some of these were shot at f11, f4 1/80... so random.
> 
> I'm not a pro but those are just my observations.



We shot 2 hours after sunset, right when the venue opened. And it  wasn't random, the changing f numbers were for me to experiment and see  the differences, and to compensate for flash since the max speed is 200  when using flash. You're right about the sun though, it was a hot day, and eventually we're going to find a place and time within the golden hour!


----------



## tirediron (May 11, 2013)

ALL of these need fill light!  For this sort of shot to work, you really need to be at LEAST 1/3 stop over ambient on the face, not 1/2 stop under.  3 & 4 need to be levelled, and watch the composition in #4; you've got her arms over her chin; dropping them down just a bit wouldn't have obscured her face.


----------



## KmH (May 11, 2013)

Do you mean 2 hours after sunrise? 

One of the features the D5100 doesn't have is Auto-FP flash sync which is pretty much needed to balance flash with sunlight for a good lighting ratio with the background darker than the subject.
(Auto-FP sync allows using shutter speeds faster than 1/200) dg28.com - photographer education

The backgrounds are pretty bright (ambient light) in all but #4, but the dappled sunlight light in #4 isn't helping.

The poses could use some adjustments, and it will take getting some more knowledge and practice to be able to make consistent exposures.
A DSLR camera meter can only measure reflected light, but it can't display the short duration of reflected light produced by a strobe. Getting outdoor portraiture exposure consistent gets a lot easier if you can also measure incident and strobe light.


----------



## Mach0 (May 11, 2013)

Try a ND filter.


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 11, 2013)

KmH said:


> Do you mean 2 hours after sunrise?
> 
> One of the features the D5100 doesn't have is Auto-FP flash sync which  is pretty much needed to balance flash with sunlight for a good lighting  ratio with the background darker than the subject.
> (Auto-FP sync allows using shutter speeds faster than 1/200) dg28.com - photographer education
> ...



So does that mean I simply can't balance flash with sunlight without  this Auto-FP flash sync? I'm thinking of getting one of those 5-in-1  reflectors soon which may help with fill light. How would you say the  poses should be changed?



Mach0 said:


> Try a ND filter.



That would lower shutter speed right? Would that make the flash more effective?


----------



## Mach0 (May 11, 2013)

DGMPhotography said:


> So does that mean I simply can't balance flash with sunlight without  this Auto-FP flash sync? I'm thinking of getting one of those 5-in-1  reflectors soon which may help with fill light. How would you say the  poses should be changed?
> 
> That would lower shutter speed right? Would that make the flash more effective?



It would cut down the light and let you use a slower shutter speed and still shoot at wider apertures.

You can balance ambient at 1/200 second but you will need to stop down your lens quite a bit resulting in needing a lot more flash power.


----------



## gsgary (May 11, 2013)

DGMPhotography said:


> So does that mean I simply can't balance flash with sunlight without  this Auto-FP flash sync? I'm thinking of getting one of those 5-in-1  reflectors soon which may help with fill light. How would you say the  poses should be changed?
> 
> That would lower shutter speed right? Would that make the flash more effective?



Shutter speed effects ambient light,F stop effects flash exposure


----------



## Vtec44 (May 11, 2013)

DGMPhotography said:


> And it  wasn't random, the changing f numbers were for me to experiment and see  the differences, and to compensate for flash since the max speed is 200  when using flash.



The reason why it looks random is one of the pictures was shot at f4.5 1/80.  Why 1/80 and f4.5?  What were you looking to get at that shutter speed and aperture?  In the middle of the day, I'd think the shutter speed would be higher.


----------



## sarah_19_nz (May 11, 2013)

Why don't I like #1?....
her pose just seems forced/awkward and not natural or relaxed. She is holding her head up and at a funny angle.


----------



## amolitor (May 11, 2013)

gsgary said:


> DGMPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > So does that mean I simply can't balance flash with sunlight without  this Auto-FP flash sync? I'm thinking of getting one of those 5-in-1  reflectors soon which may help with fill light. How would you say the  poses should be changed?
> ...



Shutter speed affects ambient light. Aperture affects BOTH ambient light AND flash exposure. This is why balancing the two isn't quite trivial.


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 11, 2013)

Interesting!


----------



## Juga (May 11, 2013)

sarah_19_nz said:


> Why don't I like #1?....
> her pose just seems forced/awkward and not natural or relaxed. She is holding her head up and at a funny angle.



I would like to add that the 'devil' shots have a bit too much lighting to cause the 'angel vs. devil' comparision. That is just my opinion though.


----------



## tirediron (May 11, 2013)

Juga said:


> I would like to add that the 'devil' shots have a bit too much lighting to cause the 'angel vs. devil' comparision. That is just my opinion though.


Agree! I think these might work better if you went about a stop and a half, or even two over ambient, and brought in fill from underneath!


----------



## Juga (May 11, 2013)

tirediron said:


> Juga said:
> 
> 
> > I would like to add that the 'devil' shots have a bit too much lighting to cause the 'angel vs. devil' comparision. That is just my opinion though.
> ...



Exactly, something very dramatic for the 'devil.' The backlighting is just too much for the theme of the devil at least.


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 11, 2013)

Yeah I definitely agree with that.


----------



## BrieKayee (May 12, 2013)

I really like them. Maybe have a pair of white wings for her to wear next time, since it is a angel vs devil. Great work Darryl


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 12, 2013)

Yeah I was actually thinking of adding some in post, but honestly it would probably look a lot better if we got some from party city, and some devil horns. Probably wouldn't be too expensive.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

Yeah, I don't think these were taken after sunset. 

Original Date/Time = 2013:05:10 09:08:20
Digitization Date/Time = 2013:05:10 09:08:20


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 13, 2013)

First off, stop hijackin my pictures' stats, that's creepy! Second, I meant sunrise..


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

DGMPhotography said:


> First off, stop hijackin my pictures' stats, that's creepy! Second, I meant sunrise..



First off, No. 

Second off, if we didn't look at your EXIF info you wouldn't have received the feedback you've got. 

If you wanted a shallower DoF, you could have shot longer than ~35mm.


----------



## Vtec44 (May 13, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> If you wanted a shallower DoF, you could have shot longer than ~35mm.



Hey, my 35 f1.4 has very shallow DOF!


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 13, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> DGMPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > First off, stop hijackin my pictures' stats, that's creepy! Second, I meant sunrise..
> ...



Learn to take a joke, yo. Sheesh. Anyway, I didn't have much room behind me as there were trees and blocking my frame.


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 13, 2013)

Behold, the glory of photoshop.


----------



## Rebekah5280 (May 13, 2013)

These pictures are not good.  :/  

You need a LOT more practice and a better understanding of composition, camera settings, light (ambient and fill flash), exposure, people and how to make them look their best (not awkward unflattering poses), etc..  

The theme that you were going for simply doesn't work in the setting with the light as bright as it is.  If I were to do something like this, I might try to find a nice shady park type setting.  Something like where the "devil" could be lurking in the darker shadows and the "Angel" on the outskirts of the shadows.  If you properly lit your subject, via flash, then you would get a much better light ratio with your background being darker so your subjects were the focus of the pictures.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

DGMPhotography said:


> Learn to take a joke, yo. Sheesh. Anyway, I didn't have much room behind me as there were trees and blocking my frame.



Not enough room? You were outside dude. 

That's perhaps the whackest excuse I've ever heard.


----------



## Derrel (May 13, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> DGMPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > Learn to take a joke, yo. Sheesh. Anyway, I didn't have much room behind me as there were trees and blocking my frame.
> ...




Reminds me of the wacky excuse,"These pics are sub-par because I was aboard a 40 foot boat."

Sound familiar?  ;-)

O.P.- There's plenty of room for improvement in the re-shoot of this assignment. Maybe you can formulate a plan that will give you light that's better and easier to work with? The dappled sunlight that KmH mentioned,briefly, is a VERY tricky type of light to work in; although not impossible to work in, dappled sunlight requires intense attention to detail, and almost perfect subject placement and fill lighting. The lens you have seems to be kind of sub-par also...are you aware that once can apply lens correction in post-processing to lower the CA and kill that subtle distortion? Cute girls, cute outfits, just the lighting was VERY tough.


----------



## Photographiend (May 13, 2013)

If you are going to get that reflector make sure you get a stand with it.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

Derrel said:


> Reminds me of the wacky excuse,"These pics are sub-par because I was aboard a 40 foot boat."
> 
> Sound familiar?  ;-)
> 
> O.P.- There's plenty of room for improvement in the re-shoot of this assignment. Maybe you can formulate a plan that will give you light that's better and easier to work with? The dappled sunlight that KmH mentioned,briefly, is a VERY tricky type of light to work in; although not impossible to work in, dappled sunlight requires intense attention to detail, and almost perfect subject placement and fill lighting. The lens you have seems to be kind of sub-par also...are you aware that once can apply lens correction in post-processing to lower the CA and kill that subtle distortion? Cute girls, cute outfits, just the lighting was VERY tough.



Please Derrel, with your limitless information and knowledge tell me how being on a 30 foot fishing boat occupied by five people (two subjects, two photogs, and a mother) and two dogs is at all similar to being on dry land with a flat; relatively unobstructed plane to move about on with near infinite ability to relocate. I'm not sure about you, but I'm not Jesus and I sure as crap can't walk on water.


----------



## Derrel (May 13, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Reminds me of the wacky excuse,"These pics are sub-par because I was aboard a 40 foot boat."
> ...



The two newbie-type excuses struck me as being almost identical. You chiding him reminded me of your lame excuse from some time ago. Hold that mirror up juuuust a little higher, my young forum member! There are almost always challenges when photographing people. Learning how to overcome challenging conditions, and not making excuses is one of the first steps we need to learn. I find it ironic that you find a 30 foot motor launch to be a challenge; try shooting aboard a 15'9" Arima sportfishing boat sometime.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

Derrel said:


> The two newbie-type excuses struck me as being almost identical. You chiding him reminded me of your lame excuse from some time ago. Hold that mirror up juuuust a little higher, my young forum member! There are almost always challenges when photographing people. Learning how to overcome challenging conditions, and not making excuses is one of the first steps we need to learn. I find it ironic that you find a 30 foot motor launch to be a challenge; try shooting aboard a 15'9" Arima sportfishing boat sometime.



So you're unable to tell me how they're at all similar? Way to make a point, per usual with you. 

I actually shot aboard a smaller vintage chris craft, but it had much more room for people.


----------



## SCraig (May 13, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > The two newbie-type excuses struck me as being almost identical. You chiding him reminded me of your lame excuse from some time ago. Hold that mirror up juuuust a little higher, my young forum member! There are almost always challenges when photographing people. Learning how to overcome challenging conditions, and not making excuses is one of the first steps we need to learn. I find it ironic that you find a 30 foot motor launch to be a challenge; try shooting aboard a 15'9" Arima sportfishing boat sometime.
> ...



I suspect, after reading Derrel's post, that the point was that excuses are unacceptable for any profession.  If you are going to accept payment for services rendered then the services are expected to be rendered.  Without any excuses.  If there is a tree behind preventing movement, then you change positions or use a wider lens.  If the light isn't good you make your own or wait until it is.  If you don't have the equipment then you rent it or don't accept the job.  When you agree to do the job you are also agreeing to the client's terms and conditions, which are basically to provide what you have been paid for.

This is a very, very important concept for any prospective professional in ANY venue to understand: NO excuse is acceptable.  You do what you are paid to do, no excuses, no whining, no anything except results.  It is one of the single most important concepts between being an amateur and a professional, and it is something that must be understood.


----------



## Vtec44 (May 13, 2013)

SCraig said:


> This is a very, very important concept for any prospective professional in ANY venue to understand: NO excuse is acceptable.  You do what you are paid to do, no excuses, no whining, no anything except results.



Pretty much!


----------



## Rebekah5280 (May 13, 2013)

SCraig said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...



Well said!!  I hate seeing excuses like "the kid wouldn't cooperate so I just got what I got.." or "it was a confined space so this is what it is..."  etc..


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

SCraig said:


> I suspect, after reading Derrel's post, that the point was that excuses are unacceptable for any profession.  If you are going to accept payment for services rendered then the services are expected to be rendered.  Without any excuses.  If there is a tree behind preventing movement, then you change positions or use a wider lens.  If the light isn't good you make your own or wait until it is.  If you don't have the equipment then you rent it or don't accept the job.  When you agree to do the job you are also agreeing to the client's terms and conditions, which are basically to provide what you have been paid for.
> 
> This is a very, very important concept for any prospective professional in ANY venue to understand: NO excuse is acceptable.  You do what you are paid to do, no excuses, no whining, no anything except results.  It is one of the single most important concepts between being an amateur and a professional, and it is something that must be understood.



Deliver quality images to the client is precisely what I did. They loved them, even with the limitations of the boat, which they even expressed to me prior to the shoot. So much to the point where I shot their wedding as well. I would have rented a jet ski to get shots off the boat, but strangely that wasnt in the budget.  

They knew what they wanted, and my ex girlfriend and I delivered. End of story.


----------



## runnah (May 13, 2013)

I need to get a boat.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

runnah said:


> I need to get a boat.



26' Macgregor might be for sale in the near future if you're interested. Power sailer with a 50horse outboard! You can water ski on it. ;-)


----------



## Rebekah5280 (May 13, 2013)

runnah said:


> I need to get a boat.



I have a boat!


----------



## ronlane (May 13, 2013)

runnah said:


> I need to get a boat.



And a jet ski..


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

ronlane said:


> And a jet ski..



And a wake board.


----------



## SCraig (May 13, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> Deliver quality images to the client is precisely what I did. They loved them, even with the limitations of the boat, which they even expressed to me prior to the shoot. So much to the point where I shot their wedding as well. I would have rented a jet ski to get shots off the boat, but strangely that wasnt in the budget.
> 
> They knew what they wanted, and my ex girlfriend and I delivered. End of story.



My comment wasn't necessarily aimed at you either, it just seemed that way since I quoted your post.  My bad, and I apologize.  It was, in fact, aimed directly at all of the prospective "Pros" who think that "I did my best" and "Sorry" are sufficient excuses for not providing what they were paid for.


----------



## runnah (May 13, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> ronlane said:
> 
> 
> > And a jet ski..
> ...




Just kidding, I have a boat, jet ski and wakeboard. Who wants to be my friend?


----------



## o hey tyler (May 13, 2013)

runnah said:


> Just kidding, I have a boat, jet ski and wakeboard. Who wants to be my friend?



Pick meeee


----------



## runnah (May 13, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > Just kidding, I have a boat, jet ski and wakeboard. Who wants to be my friend?
> ...



Ok, but if Kathy or Mishele want to come, you are getting bumped.


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 13, 2013)

What just happened to my thread? Anyway, I don't own any boating vehicles. If and when I get that reflector, I do plan to get a stand (any suggestions?), and I wasn't paid for this shoot. It was as much for her as it was for me. If you compare this to my last shoot with her I think in at least some aspects it's a little better. Thanks!


----------



## Derrel (May 13, 2013)

Tips are usually best when received and pondered _before_ a tricky photo shoot. I think the addition of the wings and halo really shows that those props would have really made the idea much more clear, more obvious....I didn't really get  the devil or angel theme from the black and white dresses...I thought it was some kind of a "twins" theme...but it could have been salt and pepper...or black and white...or just "two cute girls, one in black, the other in white."

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned one alternative to both reflector fill and flash--and that is just simply "opening up the lens", and allowing the brighter backgrounds to blow out...done with a bit of care, that can look pretty decent. It takes emphasis off of the background by making it less-recognizable, which can be of a lot of help when you do not have a long lens to throw things out of focus...when working with a crop-body camera and short lens lengths, so you can manage to get a full-length figure from close range, simply overexposing the background can work pretty well.

As far as outdoors and reflectors: think rectangular panels!!! Why??? MUCH more surface area than round, disc refelectors. MUCH more usable area!!! Also, rectangular, or square panels are much,much easier to stabilize, and to turk-spike down. Round reflectors demand grip arms and clamps and stands and shot bags...major PITA. For outdoors, I use C-stands, because they have very heavy, heavy bases. Regular, light duty strands outdoors are an accident waiting to happen, and demand shot bags, turf spikes, and if it's windy, even guy wires and stakes...they suck outdoors.


----------



## DGMPhotography (May 13, 2013)

Yeah I did that with one of them and definitely noticed the effect!!


----------

