# soot



## mmaria (Sep 7, 2015)




----------



## Milky (Sep 7, 2015)

background needs to be cleaned up. Too much halo around the face that doesn't seem natural.
portrait in itself is OK, but with this greyish background it doesn't fit that much, directly in a work environement or a darker background that suggest being in a really dark place would have been way better IMO.


----------



## medic2230 (Sep 7, 2015)

I think it would work with a darker background and tone the halo down. Is this a HDR?


----------



## tirediron (Sep 7, 2015)

Have to agree.  This is one of the very few (the first perhaps?) images I've seen that would actually work well against a dark, brick wall.  The face is great.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 7, 2015)

I'd like to see just a bit more detail in the hair. If there is anything that could be burned down, it would be the neck area, to make the face pop a bit more. The face is fairly bright and appears well-lighted, and that's why I say I would like to see more light on the hair; the light looks as if the hair would also show up pretty well and not go so dark. Same with the shirt; the two combined being dark make this look like fairly heavy post-processing vignetting added after the fact, which sort of hurts the impact of this gritty, honest day's work, "real" type of portrait. 

As for the graduated background looking like a halo...I'm from the old school of doing things, so that looks like a flash fired onto paper to me, and it's one of the ways I was taught to light backgrounds, to get a 100% natural "real" gradient background rendering, but I understand how some people in today's word would think of that as some kind of artifice.

Since the photo was posted without a single word, it's tough to do anything except offer honest commentary on it.


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 7, 2015)

chim chim charoo!


----------



## mmaria (Sep 8, 2015)

Milky said:


> background needs to be cleaned up. Too much halo around the face that doesn't seem natural.
> portrait in itself is OK, but with this greyish background it doesn't fit that much, directly in a work environement or a darker background that suggest being in a really dark place would have been way better IMO.





medic2230 said:


> I think it would work with a darker background and tone the halo down. Is this a HDR?





tirediron said:


> Have to agree.  This is one of the very few (the first perhaps?) images I've seen that would actually work well against a dark, brick wall.  The face is great.



no it's not HDR

I agree that it would look better with darker bg but it just didn't come trough my mind when I did the photo 

Also, what halo... do you mean brightened center of the bg or he's got halo from pp on his face?


----------



## mmaria (Sep 8, 2015)

Derrel said:


> I'd like to see just a bit more detail in the hair. If there is anything that could be burned down, it would be the neck area, to make the face pop a bit more. The face is fairly bright and appears well-lighted, and that's why I say I would like to see more light on the hair; the light looks as if the hair would also show up pretty well and not go so dark. Same with the shirt; the two combined being dark make this look like fairly heavy post-processing vignetting added after the fact, which sort of hurts the impact of this gritty, honest day's work, "real" type of portrait.
> 
> As for the graduated background looking like a halo...I'm from the old school of doing things, so that looks like a flash fired onto paper to me, and it's one of the ways I was taught to light backgrounds, to get a 100% natural "real" gradient background rendering, but I understand how some people in today's word would think of that as some kind of artifice.
> 
> Since the photo was posted without a single word, it's tough to do anything except offer honest commentary on it.



Thank you for your comment!

It's not flash and it's not heavy vignette , it was just a wall but the roof was giving some shade which I didn't notice because the shoot was very quickly done


----------



## mmaria (Sep 8, 2015)

pixmedic said:


> chim chim charoo!


"Codeword in the gay community for a back alley blowjob on a drunk straight guy.
I'm taking this guy out back for a little of the ole chim chim charoo."

hm... welll.. I learned something new...

ty I guess!


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 8, 2015)

mmaria said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > chim chim charoo!
> ...




what?
um..I guess I learned something new too....
wherever you live, its got some weird language...
you have officially ruined my memory of a great childhood movie. 
I was thinking....


----------



## mmaria (Sep 8, 2015)

pixmedic said:


> mmaria said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...


oh no!

you can't get away with that!

look at this Urban dictionary chim chim charoo

LOL


----------



## medic2230 (Sep 8, 2015)

mmaria said:


> no it's not HDR
> 
> I agree that it would look better with darker bg but it just didn't come trough my mind when I did the photo
> 
> Also, what halo... do you mean brightened center of the bg or he's got halo from pp on his face?




I've done this quite a few times and seen it after I get it on the computer and wish I had done the background different. I do like the portrait though. It looks like he just got done with a long days work and is ready to go home. 

Yes, I was talking about the bright center directly behind his head. I guess the light was just more focused in one spot behind him that I'm used to seeing. I was taught the same as Derrel with the gradient on the background I just remembered it as a circle that the light fell off from like in my avatar pic.


----------



## medic2230 (Sep 8, 2015)

mmaria said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > chim chim charoo!
> ...



 O M G !


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 8, 2015)

mmaria said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > mmaria said:
> ...



my reference was far more relevant!
soot? chimney sweep?
stupid fake dictionary...


----------



## mmaria (Sep 8, 2015)

pixmedic said:


> mmaria said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...


well

you know I have to google everything  

it's not my fault!


but I get a big laugh out of this so everything is fine


----------



## vfotog (Sep 8, 2015)

mmaria said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > mmaria said:
> ...



but by far most of the google results are about the original meaning from Mary Poppins. jeez...


----------



## Derrel (Sep 8, 2015)

medic223 said:
			
		

> Yes, I was talking about the bright center directly behind his head. I guess the light was just more focused in one spot behind him that I'm used to seeing. I was taught the same as Derrel with the gradient on the background I just _remembered it as a circle that the light fell off from like in my avatar pic_.



Yeah, if a round, parabolic reflector is used, it often has a nice, rounded edge to the beam. If a speedlight is used from fairly close to a wall or a background fabric or seamless paper, it tends to make  more of a rectilinear-shaped pattern on the background. If the flash is turned on it side, so the narrow beam spread goes straight up and down, it tends to light up the background in a narrow, but somewhat tall shape, then it falls off very abruptly at the top and bottom, a lot like in the post from mmaria. If the beam angle is set to a tele-angle, like the 85mm zoom position or whatever, the spread of the beam, is pretty narrow. How wide the area covered ends up being depends on how far away the flash is, what the beam's angle is set to, and how powerful the flash is. If anybody wishes to make this type of background, this is about what it looks like with the flash set perpendicular to the wall, and aimed from about the mid-back height of the subject, straight at the wall from about three feet at lowish power on tele-zoom. Lights up the paper, then a sharp, abrupt 5-stop fade to dark.


----------



## mmaria (Sep 9, 2015)

vfotog said:


> mmaria said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...




Ok @pixmedic  and @vfotog , this is really stupid! You're both are making me look bad with no valid reason.

And go check google results again! I google it a few times just to be sure if he's really meant it that way.

Jason said 





pixmedic said:


> *chim chim charoo*!


not *chim chim cheree
*
The first result you get from "chim chim charoo" is that one I quoted




 

I assumed it was just a spelling mistake and I thought we'll just laugh at it and that's it, but you guys brought it to another level.


----------



## snerd (Sep 9, 2015)

Not that there's anything wrong with that.........................


----------



## FITBMX (Sep 9, 2015)

pixmedic said:


> what?
> um..I guess I learned something new too....
> wherever you live, its got some weird language...
> you have officially ruined my memory of a great childhood movie.
> I was thinking....



Those childhood movies always have lots of hidden meanings.


----------



## FITBMX (Sep 9, 2015)

Other than the background being a little too bright, which "you live and learn". But other than that it is very nice.


----------



## beagle100 (Sep 9, 2015)

I'm thinking maybe a little clean up before the next portrait session


----------



## jcdeboever (Sep 9, 2015)

I flipping love it. It made me wonder if he staged his sootieness? He is too pretty to be that sooty.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## mmaria (Sep 11, 2015)

FITBMX said:


> Other than the background being a little too bright, which "you live and learn". But other than that it is very nice.


 thank you 



beagle100 said:


> I'm thinking maybe a little clean up before the next portrait session


 lol, we'll try 



jcdeboever said:


> I flipping love it. It made me wonder if he staged his sootieness? He is too pretty to be that sooty.


I told him what you said 

He happened to clean the chimney that day and I took the opportunity. He doesn't work in sooty environment


----------



## jcdeboever (Sep 11, 2015)

mmaria said:


> FITBMX said:
> 
> 
> > Other than the background being a little too bright, which "you live and learn". But other than that it is very nice.
> ...


I knew it! [emoji13] 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## mmaria (Sep 11, 2015)

jcdeboever said:


> mmaria said:
> 
> 
> > FITBMX said:
> ...



yes you did


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 11, 2015)

mmaria said:


> vfotog said:
> 
> 
> > mmaria said:
> ...




I didn't!
I thought it was funny!


----------

