# Not The Best Subject



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

MSnowy inspired me to step out of my comfort zone and in front of the camera. Never have liked having my picture taken, plus the added challenge of being both photographer and subject. I've had the AB's for two weeks, but only just had a chance to actually try them last night. In retrospect the choice of location was not the best. I was limited on space, and ended up only using one of the AB's with the octabox, and a YN560/umbrella to skim the wall/background, and provide a little separation. Large white reflector set about two feet away on the right. I was shooting for a 2:1 ratio.  It was getting late, and I was getting tired, so I quit on this one. Pretty much out of camera, with only LR camera specific presets applied. Other than my choice of subject, any comments on how to improve for next time.


View attachment 132287


----------



## jcdeboever (Dec 29, 2016)

I am impressed. I think you did a great job first time out.  I have no advise in this area but I like what you have done here.


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

Thanks @jcdeboever I definitely need more practice, a different place to set up, and a more willing subject!


----------



## Granddad (Dec 29, 2016)

The biggest problem is with the pose, in my opinion. You look like you're waiting to be shot with a .357 magnum instead of a camera. 

I hate having my photo taken, too, it seems to be a common factor with photographers. I have no idea how many shots I took to get my profile pic but it was an awful lot! Relax, shoulders back, hands (holding the remote button) loosely in your lap, chin up and forward a little. Smiling isn't compulsory though your facial expression seems to be reflecting the tenseness of the pose as a whole. The lighting looks good to me as is.

B+ "Shows promise."


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

Granddad said:


> You look like you're waiting to be shot with a .357 magnum instead of a camera.



You nailed it LOL. I was trying to lean forward slightly but only  realized the "hunched shoulders" after the fact, something I hope I would have seen if I'd been behind the camera. Maybe if try it more, I could relax a little.


----------



## Granddad (Dec 29, 2016)

You've inspired me. I've been thinking it was time to update my profile image: this one is several years old and I was very pleased with it. Not sure I could do it again.


----------



## jcdeboever (Dec 29, 2016)

smoke665 said:


> Granddad said:
> 
> 
> > You look like you're waiting to be shot with a .357 magnum instead of a camera.
> ...



At least you got your shirt on....


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

@Granddad I liken it to "Physician Heal Thyself". I need a LOT OF CORRECTION.


----------



## jcdeboever (Dec 29, 2016)

Granddad said:


> You've inspired me. I've been thinking it was time to update my profile image: this one is several years old and I was very pleased with it. Not sure I could do it again.



Yeah, your looking pretty dapper, see if you can out-dapper yourself.... oh, leave your shirt on too....


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

@jcdeboever funny you should mention that. It was warm, while I was setting up, and the shirt was to much! LOL


----------



## FITBMX (Dec 29, 2016)

Stepping in front of the camera is something I had to work past, I don't mind it so much now. But that first time was less than exciting! LOL


----------



## tirediron (Dec 29, 2016)

For a first time?  Pretty damn good!  I would say you acheived your 2:1, and I think the lighting is pretty good.  The key light could stand to have been reduced maybe 1/3 stop or so.  You got the "lean forward" part right, but you forgot the "chin down" part.  As well, you've made a common mistake with your arms; putting your hands on the outside pulls your shoulders down.  Looking at my profile shot (for nothing else aside from the position of the arms, please!) note the way my hands are positioned and how it affects my shoulders.






Did you want me to move this into the "Are photographers too grumpy?" thread?


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

@tirediron Thank you for the kind words. I actually found myself thinking through the shot, and making informed adjustments thanks to this forum. I didn't quite know what to do with the hands. Unfortunate effect of aging is that the skin on back of my hands is so thin that anything that touches, bruises or skins. I'd been working on an auto repair, so the left hand was so horrible I didn't want to show it. The right hand wasn't much better, but I managed to clone out some of the bruises. I was also using a metal folding chair which wasn't the right height, and little narrow. Will follow your suggestions on lighting and posture on the next try.


----------



## tirediron (Dec 29, 2016)

Monochrome conversions hide a LOT of sins!   Especially epidermal ones.  You can do the same thing with your arms from a standing position, essentially cupping each elbow with the opposite hand.  If you're going to do that, make sure that you're NOT square to the camera, and your camera is at or very slightly above eye-level otherwise it's going to produce one intimidating shot (which, if that's your intent is absolutely fine).


----------



## Derrel (Dec 29, 2016)

HEY! Nice to put a face to the name. Selfies can be very difficult, very challenging. Much more difficult than photographing another person. I like the "realness" of the shot, it's very direct, very straight-ahead. As some others have alluded to, the shoulders are a bit hunched forward. I think Grandad's letter grade and comment, " B+, shows promise" is pretty much how I feel. I like mostly everything about it, except the slight foreward hunching of the shoulders. I don't mind the hand in the shot.


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

Thanks @Derrel appreciate the comments. Yes it's especially difficult when you don't like being photographed. Maybe that comes from all the years of not being in family photos because I was the one behind the camera. LOL Comments noted, and filed for inclusion in the future.

Other than the posture/positioning, are there other things that could help move it up a notch. I noticed after the fact that the color of the background didn't seem to help the skin tone, and there's a variance in the background tint from side to side, caused by lighting placement.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 29, 2016)

I don't mind the background's color/density fade all that much. The plus is the light side of the backdrop coordinates with the light side of the face, and the dark with the dark side of the face. I dunno about "improving it"; it is what it is, it's in a style some would call hyperrealism. The pores show, the chest hair shows, everything shows up as "REAL". Not all retouched.

It is what it is.It is a *type* of photo portrait. You could add more light to the eyes by lighting it differently if you want, maybe bounce another strobe off of a panel in front of the subject or off of a wall, to get a bigger catchlight, but on a selfie...eyeglasses reflection control could be tedious (easier to be behind the camera to handle the eyeglass reflections). Any changes made would change the type of shot you'd wind up with.

Many people these days retouch and edit and perfect skin and details to the nnnth degree...I seldom do that. B&W conversions in Lightroom, using the Blue, Blue H-C, Green, and Red, Orange filters, and the Outdoors B&W and All-Purose B&W presets can change a shot like this quite a bit. Adding a huge amount of clarity could make this better, to some people (not to the Dragon Effect degree) who like a high-contrast, hard-edges portrait.

I think maybe that's an issue some might have: this has warm tones, but a rugged face and expression. Maybe it needs a harder-edged look to it to match pose/expression to the finished image toning? maybe a hard-edge B&W rendering would move the meter needle upward a bit?


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

Derrel said:


> I don't mind the background's color/density fade all that much. The plus is the light side of the backdrop coordinates with the light side of the face, and the dark with the dark side of the face. I dunno about "improving it"; it is what it is, it's in a style some would call hyperrealism. The pores show, the chest hair shows, everything shows up as "REAL". Not all retouched.
> 
> It is what it is.It is a *type* of photo portrait. You could add more light to the eyes by lighting it differently if you want, maybe bounce another strobe off of a panel in front of the subject or off of a wall, to get a bigger catchlight, but on a selfie...eyeglasses reflection control could be tedious (easier to be behind the camera to handle the eyeglass reflections). Any changes made would change the type of shot you'd wind up with.
> 
> ...



Just a personal artistic opinion, but I prefer the,  hyperrealism/hard look on males, softer skin, and sharp eyes on females and children.  Maybe it's an age thing - grew up in a different time. 

Interesting side note just for you - raw files were imported, processed, and adjusted all within LR. No PS edits were used at any time. The temptation was great but I resisted!

Here's a B&W conversion in LR. Used a LR preset then adjusted to this. Not sure if the contrast is up enough, but I tried more and didn't seem to help the image. Afterward, brought the exposure up +.36

View attachment 132303


----------



## loonatic45414 (Dec 29, 2016)

You've got excellent features to make a great Winston Churchill portrait.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Derrel (Dec 29, 2016)

Print it. Frame it. Save it for the grandkids.

Looks pretty good as a B&W selfie! The thing about portraits is this: the longer you look at a print of one, the more you notice. This has a number of small, nuanced details. Like, for example, the exact, precise litle bits of space on the left margin, and the lower left corner (brilliant!). And the highlights on the skin in a few places.

Come back to this image in some time, like a month, and see if you still like it. I bet you will.

 Moving from color to B&W ups the ruggedness factor about 10-fold.

Glad to hear this was edited in an all-Lightroom, politically-correct, environmentally safe, sustainable environment.


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

@Derrel, can't promise I won't slip back over to the "dark side" occasionally, but the last few days I've learned a lot about LR, such that it will be a part of the workflow.

@loonatic45414 Not sure about the Churchill thing. LOL


----------



## loonatic45414 (Dec 29, 2016)

If I were the artist and you were the subject, I think the old corporate portrait look like they used to hang in the smoky executive boardroom - possibly R. L. Farthington III, Founder - at the bottom. That's the look I get from the stern face anyway.  Maybe a quote about the value of a man being tied to the number of calluses on his hands. Just having fun!

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

@loonatic45414 Actually it probably resembles the first face my OTR drivers saw when the fleet manger kicked them up to me for a talk. It usually preceded an old fashion A**Chewing, termination, or both. My Mother always told me to not make faces or my face would freeze that way. After 25 yrs and a LOT of talks, I guess Mom was right!


----------



## loonatic45414 (Dec 29, 2016)

I think we all need a good old-fashioned a** chewing as a part of learning about life and gaining wisdom. Probably not enough goes on anymore. I hope I've given you something to think about from an unbiased perspective. Just don't ever get ME in front of the lens and we're cool. Haha

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk


----------



## zombiesniper (Dec 29, 2016)

Not knowing much about portraiture, I think these are great shots. I do like the B&W better.

Great first attempt.

P.S. Don't be so harsh on the model. Everyones face gets experience, only the smart ones learn from it.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 29, 2016)

I thought the eye camera right needed more light, so I dodged it in LR, and burned down the shirt's brighter areas, then lightened the entirety of your head. This is two LR B&W presets, combined. Total edit time, less than one minute. Unsharpened, and from a JPEG, the file worked pretty easily.




I went from the color file to this rugged, masculine, strong-contrast type image which I think looks good for the pose, subject, and the clothing being worn.


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 29, 2016)

Derrel said:


> I went from the color file to this rugged, masculine, strong-contrast type image which I think looks good for the pose, subject, and the clothing being worn.



Don't know Derrel, maybe a little too intense???? I had worked the image to a "darker" level earlier then pulled back.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 29, 2016)

smoke665 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > I went from the color file to this rugged, masculine, strong-contrast type image which I think looks good for the pose, subject, and the clothing being worn.
> ...


Yes maybe it is a little bit intense but I think it would make a fine print on a glossy surface paper. It looks just super here on this screen. Of course this is just one guy's interpretation of how this should be done. There is no one right answer, but yes it is a high contrast look for sure.

My Philosophy on editing pictures is never to go with that day's opinion on any image. I always like to come back to an image of a day or two or three or 30 days later to see how it holds up. For various reasons I think it's unwise to judge how an image should be on day one. Yeah this could be scaled back a bit but I think it looks pretty good this way.


----------



## Rick50 (Dec 29, 2016)

I like the B&W version. Yes, Derrel went a tad strong but his lighting adjustments helped.


----------



## photo1x1.com (Jan 2, 2017)

I think your lighting is pretty good, especially for a first try and a "more than real" look, showing more contrast in a face than there usually is, which is one possible style. This style I hardly ever use for clients, but rather with friends and self portraits for the fun of it. People tend to not like this kind of lighting (especially not of themselves). Almost everybody says: oh, look at all those wrinkles, please retouch them. The interesting thing is: photographers seem to like that kind of look much more than other people.
That´s why with portraits I do prefer a more friendly look. So I tried to brighten up some parts of the face, reduced the contrast in the face and reduced the lighting a bit on everything but the face. This could have been done by changing the ratio of the light and/or placing them differently (move them towards the camera in z-axis and more towards the face in x-axis), but I guess you know that anyway.



Well, and then, I would have tried a little smile .  
Most of my clients enter the door saying - it´s gonna be hard work because I don´t like to be in front of the camera at all, and btw: I look really bad on images. In fact around 80% of them are having fun, 10% don´t really care and mainly want their image quickly and only 10% of them are really hard to shoot.
Not everybody has to like being in front of a camera, but most of those who don´t just take themselves and everything they do a little too serious. Making fun of yourself and your little shortcommings (if they are even there!!!) goes a long way. Luckily I have quite good attributes for that - I have a bald head, skew teeth, and a long crooked nose. I am allowed to tell people not to care about their teeth when they refuse to smile in front of the camera, and I tell them that other people looking at their images will be attracted by their smile rather than their teeth, or by their eyes becoming smaller when they smile. The vast majority would never do that in public, so why should they look like that on their portraits?
I just recently shot a series of images of myself - just for the fun of it. Here is a comparison of two - which one do you think people (NOT PHOTOGRAPHERS!!!) liked best and which one do I like best? I think I look best not smiling - people usually think the exact oposite (except some photographers  ).


 

To cut the long words short: don´t be afraid to smile, people will like it!


----------



## smoke665 (Jan 2, 2017)

@photo1x1.com  I was Smiling! You should see my frown! LOL. All kidding aside I'd probably fall in that last 10% category. Something about the way the muscles are in my face when I smile the eyes close. Looks weird.

The excersise wasn't supposed to be about my mug, though it's helped my understanding of posing others. I was shooting for a 2:1 ratio but without benefit of a meter, I missed the mark slightly. I will say that the original is much better than the Web image. Space limitations prevented me from moving the reflector forward more which would have helped. 

One advantage I have is that it's not a job, but a hobby. After 45 years in business all I worry about is pleasing myself now.


----------

