# Subdued Narratives



## FKP007 (Jun 28, 2015)

Latest body of work. One light and reflector. Images shot at 70 mm,  85mm and 135mm using my 70-200 2.8. One of the reasons I love using this lens is the quality compression and ability to shoot different crops without moving ones position.












Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## FITBMX (Jun 28, 2015)

It is an incredible set, but #2 just wonderful! I love everything about it!!!


----------



## Derrel (Jun 28, 2015)

Nice. I've always liked understated, simple-background studio shots with painted-type backgrounds. The monochromatic nature of wardrobe,hair,background all works great together.


----------



## BrickHouse (Jun 29, 2015)

Lovely set!


----------



## mmaria (Jun 29, 2015)

your processing is very pleasing and beautiful


----------



## rexbobcat (Jun 29, 2015)

Bryston3bsst said:


> I guess I'll be the dissenter. And it's really just one thing and that is the fact that she, other than her skin, blends into the dark background to the point where I can barely see her.
> 
> Other than that it's a pretty set.



It's reminiscent of classical painting techniques, which is probably why they did it like that. Had they used a hair/rim light, I feel like it would have commercialized and sterilized the images.


----------



## FKP007 (Jun 29, 2015)

Bryston3bsst said:


> I guess I'll be the dissenter. And it's really just one thing and that is the fact that she, other than her skin, blends into the dark background to the point where I can barely see her.
> 
> Other than that it's a pretty set.


Although I thank you for the feedback I have to totally disagree. In no way does the model disappear into the background to the point you can barely see her. There is a clear tonal, textural and colour difference between the dress and background and her contours are clearly defined and obviously apparent. Even in the darkest part of the image 1 and 2 (near the bottom) the edges of her dress are clearly visible. I can only think you are seeing the images on a small phone screen or low screen brightness. 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## FKP007 (Jun 29, 2015)

Bryston3bsst said:


> Ooohhh......now we're resorting to name calling.
> 
> How mature.
> 
> ...


Well I clearly thanked you for your feedback and simply responded. It's you who came back with attitude about the bigger screen on your fancy Hewlett Packard. So to me, it seems you need thicker skin. I'm all for criticism when the person doing it can give a decent justification for their opinion, which you obviously can't. Anyway enjoy staring at your big screen master editor lol



Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## FKP007 (Jun 29, 2015)

Bryston3bsst said:


> FKP007 said:
> 
> 
> > I can only think* you are seeing the images on a small phone screen or low screen brightness. *
> ...


It was a reasonable assumption considering you said you could "barely see her". 

And people use their phones for more than just making and receiving phone calls nowadays...jeez.

Done.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## Southbound33 (Jun 29, 2015)

Well that was fun


----------



## BrickHouse (Jun 29, 2015)

In before the lock.


----------



## DanOstergren (Jun 30, 2015)

Bryston3bsst said:


> I guess I'll be the dissenter. And it's really just one thing and that is the fact that she, other than her skin, blends into the dark background to the point where I can barely see her.
> 
> Other than that it's a pretty set.


I agree with the topic author; I'm on a calibrated screen and there is a clear difference between the model and the background and she is very clearly visible.


----------



## Jasii (Jun 30, 2015)

Here I come with the "Peace Pipe"  
The word 'Subdued' in the subject says it all and the author as the artist here is entitled to his artistic expression which has been executed rather well in the shots here.
Having said that, I as a layman will be honest in my remarks that my first initial thoughts were: The images do tend to appear merged with the bg. Also maybe it appears more pronounced with the all black dress!
Since the pics are not OK to edit, would request the creator if he can edit and upload one with a complementing BG? Just for a learning curve please?

Jasii

Ps. Don't take me to the cleaners for this please!


----------



## FKP007 (Jul 1, 2015)

DanOstergren said:


> Bryston3bsst said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I'll be the dissenter. And it's really just one thing and that is the fact that she, other than her skin, blends into the dark background to the point where I can barely see her.
> ...


Thank you Dan. I too work on a fully calibrated dual monitor setup and having a subject disappear into the background is a somewhat elementary mistake that I wouldn't have made considering the time it took to put the whole thing together. If people are finding the subject disappearing into the background and can't see the tonal difference then I can only conclude the monitor settings must be off.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## FKP007 (Jul 1, 2015)

Bryston3bsst said:


> FKP007 said:
> 
> 
> > Jasii said:
> ...


Firstly I was done with this post awhile back but more specifically done with your bs. I have no issue with critique but the inital attitude came from you and your gloating about your calibrated monitor which quite honestly, made you come across as a douche. I simply implied you maybe using a phone to see the image just as i am now as I write this response (many people do the same) however that statement obviously annoyed you hence the arse response. Secondly I really don't need a lecture from you about photography being a subjective art form, I know this all too well and most likely better than you. I also understand the importance of feedback and constructive criticism however that doesn't mean I or anyone else have to agree with the critique and have every right to challenge it without people throwing a wobbly. 

I still disagree and like someone else has stated on this post, they see a clear distinction between background and subject. This particular set is not exclusive to this forum and is posted in various other places too with the critique detailing other things such as slightly yellowed skin tones and loss of some details in certain shadow areas all of which I can concur with. 

Anyway I'm done talking about the image and with you mate, I think it's fair to say we disagree on all points so let's leave it at that. 

P.S. I have no intention of reediting and uploading any other versions as, quite frankly, I can't be arsed. 



Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## FKP007 (Jul 1, 2015)

And btw the hazy flat processing is quite simply an aesthetic that traditional film produced and has a visual beauty to it that a lot of people connect with. However that purely is a subjective taste.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 1, 2015)

Beautifully done.

Sometimes I've found that photos don't always show up as well on a site like this as they do on the photographer's website, and of course people have varying computers and monitors and devices they're using to view them. I think what Jasii might have been asking about was to learn more about the process (a 'learning curve') since the dark dress against a dark background is subtle and might make it harder for a learner to _see_ what was done to achieve these photos. A description can be helpful but some people learn better visually.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 1, 2015)

Subdued narratives...white-hot controversy!!!

Just as a thought: I am wondering about difference baseline system gamma of Windows versus Macintosh....

What is the OP editing on?


----------



## FKP007 (Jul 1, 2015)

Yes I need help Bryston and you need a slap. 

But anyway for those who are interested in the look it's really a two part process that is as much about the inital capture than it is the photoshop work.

1) Soft focus. I shot it all at 2.8 
2) Centrally composed subject 
3) simple loop or rembrandt style lighting soft with fill 
4) painted backdrop giving dense thick rich textures and a matt finish 
5) subject posture is soft, fragile and almost ballet like. 
6) subject expression subdued 
7) styling in keeping with period paintings 

Post 
1) simple clean up no major contouring or d and b as soft focus has killed any imperfections anyway
2) add noise/grain 
3) reduce contrast and muddy the blacks a little with either cool or warm tones 
4) warm skin simulate candle light 
5) add texture to image low opacity soft light layer mask away areas 
6) crop to square composition 
7) colour grade as you like 
8) selectively sharpen eyes and small details. 

Hope this helps.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## FKP007 (Jul 1, 2015)

Derrel said:


> Subdued narratives...white-hot controversy!!!
> 
> Just as a thought: I am wondering about difference baseline system gamma of Windows versus Macintosh....
> 
> What is the OP editing on?


Editing on dual monitor MAC setup and I have a matt LG 26" calibrated monitor that I use for checks. I do a fair amount of work for local magazines here in the Middle East a lot of stuff goes to print. 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 1, 2015)

I read through parts of this thread, so before I even took a close look at the actual pictures, I re-calibrated my monitor just to be safe. I have a 28" IPS monitor calibrated with an x-rite colormunki Display. 

even given that its a dark subject against a dark background, im not personally having any trouble viewing the separation between the girl, the dress, and the background.  the bottom of the dress does blend into the background more than the top end, but it seems to work well for these shots. #2 is definitely my favorite of the set.


----------



## FKP007 (Jul 1, 2015)

pixmedic said:


> I read through parts of this thread, so before I even took a close look at the actual pictures, I re-calibrated my monitor just to be safe. I have a 28" IPS monitor calibrated with an x-rite colormunki Display.
> 
> even given that its a dark subject against a dark background, im not personally having any trouble viewing the separation between the girl, the dress, and the background.  the bottom of the dress does blend into the background more than the top end, but it seems to work well for these shots. #2 is definitely my favorite of the set.


Thank you for your input. Yes the bottom of the dress does match closely with the darker tones of the background, done intentionally to create a sense of emergence from the dark almost like a bottom sectioned vignette. X-rite rocks I use the passport for all my shoots!

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## tirediron (Jul 1, 2015)

Okay folks, let's play nice or the big, bad moderator will lock the sand-box!!  Remember, critique is subjective, and simply because someone posts something about your image with which you do not agree does not make the critique bad, wrong, or invalid.


----------



## chuasam (Jul 2, 2015)

FKP007 said:


> DanOstergren said:
> 
> 
> > Bryston3bsst said:
> ...


Chill dude, some people just have poor visual acuity.
Great work. Love them all. If there's any quibble it would be the way the butterfly prop sits unnaturally in the second image.


----------



## FKP007 (Jul 2, 2015)

tirediron said:


> Okay folks, let's play nice or the big, bad moderator will lock the sand-box!!  Remember, critique is subjective, and simply because someone posts something about your image with which you do not agree does not make the critique bad, wrong, or invalid.


Agree and if some responds to that critique with their opinion that too doesn't make it bad.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## JasonChildrenPhotography (Jul 2, 2015)

Im new to this forum and seriously hope that these handbag throwing sessions are not the norm. As for the work I love it, its fantastic very well done and the colour and tones are awesome well done.


----------



## IrvKanemoto (Jul 2, 2015)

Being new I agree with Jason above.

I read through this whole mess and I don't understand what all the flap is about. One guy says that the dark areas lose definition and the OP didn't take it very well and it escalated from there. Are all non complimentary comments met with an argument on this forum? I thought that was what you're supposed to do, express your take on a posted image.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 2, 2015)

IrvKanemoto said:


> ... I thought that was what you're supposed to do, express your take on a posted image.


 That is what you're supposed to do; sometimes one becomes so attached to one's image(s) that it's hard to remain objective about them and then "discussion" ensues.  It is however NOT the norm.


----------



## FKP007 (Jul 2, 2015)

tirediron said:


> IrvKanemoto said:
> 
> 
> > ... I thought that was what you're supposed to do, express your take on a posted image.
> ...


Firstly I'm not so attached to the image that it bothers me when people critique, it's just a photograph of hundreds one has taken. If you read the post fully you will see that the chap didn't like me questioning his critique. 

I'm also new to the forum and I hope it isn't one of those where if you disagree with someone's critique, they will throw a tantrum and try to make you out to be the villain. I dislike the idea that just because someone gives you critique, you're required to agree with it and change your photos to their liking. 

I also can't stand it when people think that expressing their dislike of a classic film look is a valid critique and somehow makes your photos less meritable. I also believe a lot of the bad attitude stems from jealousy. 

You always get trolls on forums just looking for any reason they can to discredit someones work that the vast majority like, and because the OP appears more knowledgeable or skilled. 

Every forum has those particular group of members who always leave sarcastic and insulting "critiques" (not saying that the chap did this on my image but in the short time I've been here I've read some quite simply, rude critiques) and then have a huge tantrum when they called out for being douchebags.

This kind of thing causes people not to post any work as they start to believe that the forum can be more detrimental to their work than it is helpful.

If someone wants to critique that's great but don't throw your dummy out of the pram if your critique is challenged, and please don't start comparing monitor sizes and calibration dribble.

Anyway let's not continue to stir the pot with further ramblings, it's kind of old and boring now. 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk


----------



## bribrius (Jul 4, 2015)

nice set. like 2


----------



## binga63 (Jul 5, 2015)

beautiful...love your processing...would like to have seen a little more separation of the model from the b/g but that is just personal taste


----------



## thereyougo! (Jul 6, 2015)

Not trying to step into a s***storm, but if I were the OP, I too would be offended if I were asked to produce a composite image instead of what he has posted.  Too many images I see and too many photography magazines encourage composite images and over processing.  I love these images, and on my calibrated screen I can see enough separation.  There is too much image manipulation in today's 'photography' it's turned into graphic design.


----------

