# First Real Try At a Photoshoot.



## Pedro_lopez (Jul 12, 2017)

We didn't do too much planning on the photoshoot since it was my first time with the model and first female model in general, I wanted to build a good relationship with her that way she is comfortable enough with me to shoot some more. As a guy I'm also nervous about telling girls things like what nail polish, what clothes, and overall what styles to go for since I don't know much about all that yet.



 

 

 

I really need some criticism. I tried dodging and burning but I'm thinking I need to learn somewhere Because the model says she doesn't like how her cheek looks like a bump in the first photo. What do you guys think?

@Derrel @tirediron @nerwin @benhasajeep


----------



## waday (Jul 12, 2017)

1 and 3 are nice. Not a fan of 2.

The bright area below neck and shoulder in #1 seems a bit distracting? Maybe burn it a little/reduce highlights here?


----------



## Designer (Jul 12, 2017)

Pedro_lopez said:


> ..the model says she doesn't like how her cheek looks like a bump in the first photo.


Exactly!  She knows how light affects her looks, and so should you.

To overcome this problem, use fill flash or a reflector.  Flash is easier to use.


----------



## Donde (Jul 12, 2017)

I wish you didn't have that awful "Caution" sign in the second. It would certainly be the best of the bunch. What is going on with her eyelashes in the first and second?


----------



## Pedro_lopez (Jul 12, 2017)

What is awful about the caution sign? 


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Pedro_lopez (Jul 12, 2017)

I'm just wondering, since I actually wanted to take it by the sign and even photoshopped other words on the sign.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Derrel (Jul 12, 2017)

Donde said:


> I wish you didn't have that awful "Caution" sign in the second. It would certainly be the best of the bunch. What is going on with her eyelashes in the first and second?



I like the Caution sign...kind of a visual pun!

Eyelashes--high sun as main light is causing the eyelashes to show their shadow! I like that effect...it's sometimes seen, not often, but sometimes.

I agree about the cheek's shape-rendering in shot #1--not the best angle on her face with that lighting, and it does make her cheek look a bit, well...ungainly I guess woukld be a polite way to put it. I like the third shot's look at her...kind of an appealing camera view of her.


----------



## Pedro_lopez (Jul 12, 2017)

Apart from getting a fill flash and or reflector, are there any books I can read to learn how to best light for feminine features?


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Derrel (Jul 12, 2017)

*How To Photograph Women Beautifully*...an oldie but a goodie! Look for it used. It will teach you a lot.

Women have not changed much in thousands of years, so this 1980's book will teach you a LOT.

Funny thing: I saw the book author's basic clamshell lighting setup on America's Top Model, being used on-location...a now 35-year-old basic glamour headshot setup, which is shown and discussed in the book to a very high degree...and the SAME, exact basics being used by a modern-day pro shooting modeling shots. This lighting pattern is easy to use on women, and looks good, and has looked great, across the decades.

Has some good tips on basic makeup strategies, lens selection, lighting, how to shoot things, a whole wealth of knowledge; the kind of stuff that used to be found only in books.


----------



## Designer (Jul 12, 2017)

Pedro_lopez said:


> Apart from getting a fill flash and or reflector,


If you have been reading some of the threads on using flash, you already know there is a learning curve, but having done so, your photography will advance tremendously.  A reflector is as cheap as a sheet of white foamcore, but you will have to have a trained assistant to hold it and position it to good effect.  In time, you will acquire more than one flash, some modifiers, light stands, remote triggers, gels, grids, and more.


----------



## qmr55 (Jul 12, 2017)

I kind of agree, the second one would be the best shot by far without the sign in it.


----------



## benhasajeep (Jul 13, 2017)

For pictures of her I like #2 the best.  But I am conflicted with the sign.  I like the fact the sign is there in play.  But at the same time it's distracting.  

If the light was more controlled in #1.  I don't think it would be a better shot.  Like if the light was restricted to just her eyes.  But with it spilling over part of her torso, I don't think it works.


----------



## Granddad (Jul 13, 2017)

Many years ago somebody here told me that the difference between a good photographer and a bad photographer is the size of his/her wastebasket. 

I'd dump #1, no reasonable amount of post processing will save it.

#2 I like the sign, it made me smile. *BUT* it distracts from the lovely young lady and having seen qmr55's crop I like it MUCH better than the original.

#3 is a nice shot and worth processing. 

Remember, it's digital, you can afford to take a hundred shots (or 500) and keep just the one that's an absolute cracker.

I see serious potential. I look forward to seeing your progress.


----------



## Pedro_lopez (Jul 13, 2017)

Honestly the biggest challenge for that day was looking through my Evf or viewfinder. Was tough figuring out how the photo came out. 

So I definitely took advantage of digital photography and shot a few and checked back in shade.

I can't argue with the fact the photo looks less distracting without the sign now after seeing the crop. 


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Pedro_lopez (Jul 13, 2017)

I meant the live view screen, don't know why I said viewfinder twice.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Designer (Jul 13, 2017)

Pedro_lopez said:


> Honestly the biggest challenge for that day was looking through my Evf or viewfinder. Was tough figuring out how the photo came out.


The LCD is unreliable for trying to judge an image.  Your camera has generated a small JPEG image for the purposes of display, but things like exposure and colors can be skewed.  The histogram is a better tool for judging the exposure.  Neither one will be easy to see in direct sunlight.


----------



## Granddad (Jul 13, 2017)

Pedro_lopez said:


> I meant the live view screen, don't know why I said viewfinder twice.


 Get used to it, it gets worse as you get older. 



Designer said:


> Pedro_lopez said:
> 
> 
> > Honestly the biggest challenge for that day was looking through my Evf or viewfinder. Was tough figuring out how the photo came out.
> ...


Agreed 110%. The screen is often deceptive. I've scanned through my shots on that thing before and been devastated because it looked like they were all rubbish and out of focus. When I got them onto my desktop and looked at the RAW images in Lightroom I had a pleasant surprise. Never trust it because it also works the other way!


----------



## FITBMX (Jul 13, 2017)

I know very little about this stuff, but if you are interested in shoot completely with natural light check out DanOstergren work. He shoot almost exclusively with natural light, and he always gives great information and tips. He really is a great guy!


----------



## KmH (Jul 13, 2017)

All light is natural light.

Four words that sum up what portrait photography is mostly about:
Light Direction.
Light Quality.
Direction & Quality of Light: Your Key to Better Portrait Photography Anywhere
On-Camera Flash: Techniques for Digital Wedding and Portrait Photography
Off-Camera Flash: Techniques for Digital Photographers

The rest is pretty much about posing and staging (make up, hair, clothes, location, props, etc).


----------



## DanOstergren (Jul 13, 2017)

Granddad said:


> I'd dump #1, no reasonable amount of post processing will save it.


I disagree. I think it's a great shot and it wouldn't take much editing to fix the issue the model was having with it.

To the OP, could you share the first one without the skin retouching?


----------



## Pedro_lopez (Jul 13, 2017)

This is before any editing


----------



## DanOstergren (Jul 13, 2017)

Pedro_lopez said:


> This is before any editing



I understand what she means by not liking the bump in her cheek, which is caused both by her bone structure and the lighting. You can use dodge and burning to reshape the light though.


----------



## Pedro_lopez (Jul 14, 2017)

Wow that looks so much better, so much smoother.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## DanOstergren (Jul 14, 2017)

Pedro_lopez said:


> Wow that looks so much better, so much smoother.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


It took about 10 minutes of dodging and burning.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 15, 2017)

I'm not quite sold on the posing and framing of the above shot...her placement within the frame area is a bit far to the right for the eye direction she has, but she's so, so beautiful! I took your original shot and cropped it a bit, and converted it to a couple similar yet subtly different black and white versions.


 Kind of going for an old, 1940's-era feel and look. Part of the 1940's-era look was the use of 4x5 inch film cameras and shallow DOF...your 50mm at f/1.8 shot gives a similar shallow DOF look...and the way the corners of the frame are somehwat blurry, and the DOF that fades fast, from the sharp lips to the OOF ears...those things  are sort of 1940's0-style image characteristics.



For some reason, she and this  second, more-contrasty B&W look remind me of an old photo that I think I have rattling around in my brain, at a subconscious level. To me, the best things about this ARE the high-sun caused eyelash shadows, her full and perfectly-shaped lips, and the sideways-directed line of gaze that she has.And that lip-shadow on her chin--sublime! The arms behind head, beginning model type pose was not ideal, so, I cropped that out, and tried to focus on the facial shape and the way the light reveals the dimensions of her cheeks, lips, and so on.


----------

