# Beautiful Senior Session



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

So here is my latest Senior Portraits.  What do you think?  C&C please!!


----------



## pisto1981 (May 29, 2013)

I like #2, nice composition.

#1 & #3 she seems very blown out. Maybe decrease the highlights

I'm no expert, this is the 1st C&C that I have given


----------



## frommrstomommy (May 29, 2013)

These are nice. I do feel like maybe you have lost too much detail in her face though with how bright they are.. 1 and 3 especially. #2 would be perfect with a lil more warmth added to her for me.


----------



## kathyt (May 29, 2013)

All three look a little bit overexposed to me. You have got some hot spots. Your WB is off on the first 2. Your posing is done well though.


----------



## ronlane (May 29, 2013)

I would agree that #1 and 3 the forehead looks blown out. #1 may just have the face overexposed which may bring back the detail.

#2 is better lite and I really like the composition.

Is she really fair skinned?


----------



## TimothyJinx (May 29, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> All three look a little bit overexposed to me. You have got some hot spots. Your WB is off on the first 2. Your posing is done well though.


+1


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

Thanks, everyone!
@ronlane, yes, she has very light skin.


----------



## cgipson1 (May 29, 2013)

You might also need to consider monitor calibration... as these are (as mentioned) very bright. Hopefully the actual shots are not overexposed too much and can be corrected in the RAW files.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

So, I adjusted #1. Thoughts?


----------



## Derrel (May 29, 2013)

I agree with pisto1981 about maybe reducing the highlights brightness of the first and third shots. In the second shot, her hands look a bit too bright for my preferred taste, but it is trciky when woking in that type of semi-shaded area...still, I'd like to see the faint shadows a bit darker, and her hands a bit darker too. Just a little bit though. To my eye, these look a bit over-sharpened for the web. 

I am not a fan of the off-center placement of the girl in #2 because of how it affects the overall picture, the overall scene. With her placed in the right hand third of the frame, the tree and its sunlight-dappled roots behind her draws a huge amount of visual attention. The bright spot on the ground is actually the brightest object in the entire frame. An alternate approach might have been to move three or four steps to your right, then aim the camera at her, and put her face in the left-third of the frame, and include the chair she was sitting on, and in that way, entirely block out those tree roots in the sunlight patch, but still include the three tree trunks. In that way, you would still have the pretty semi-wooded, park, three trees + creek naturalistic background, but also show her in a sideways seated chair pose, which is usually cute on a girl her age.

Your first and third shots have simple, non-distracting, naturalistic backgrounds, which is good.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

I turned down the exposure on #3 (attached above), but it still seems to be bright, leaving out a bit of her face??


----------



## cgipson1 (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> I turned down the exposure on #3 (attached above), but it still seems to be bright, leaving out a bit of her face??



did you shoot in RAW? Can you make the files available via dropbox or something?

I checked out your blog. Your photos have some issues. Under / Overexposed, Harsh Lighting, skin tones, some are soft, processing is inconsistent. It does look like you need to calibrate your monitor... that would help a good bit in showing what you should be seeing. But you can improve easily if you hang around and post photos for C&C. 

Hopefully you have obtained whatever licenses are needed in your area, and are paying taxes. You also need to do a CODB.. and figure out realistic pricing. Insurance would be a good idea too.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

@cgipson1  No, I'd rather not share my photos that way.  If you'd like to edit them, you can use the files right here.
And I can edit my pictures and run my photography the way I like.  It's really none of your business.


----------



## cgipson1 (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> @cgipson1  No, I'd rather not share my photos that way.  If you'd like to edit them, you can use the files right here.
> And I can edit my pictures and run my photography the way I like.  It's really none of your business.



I was trying to help... and the photos on here are so badly overexposed that they can't be edited in a way that would help much. 

But don't worry... I won't try and help again!   

(and I really hope the IRS is reading this, lol!)


----------



## The_Traveler (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> @cgipson1  No, I'd rather not share my photos that way.  If you'd like to edit them, you can use the files right here.
> And I can edit my pictures and run my photography the way I like.  It's really none of your business.



Once you have converted the raw files into jpgs you've lost much of the information needed to edit them back from this overexposure.

Your response to charlie was really rude; he was attempting to help you.
if you don't think these are drastically overexposed, your monitor is way off.

Unless you apologize you don't deserve any more help.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

You know what, I'd rather not have your kind of "help."  It's really neither constructive nor helpful.
I realize they were overexposed.  That happened when I processed them smaller for the web, and I can fix that myself.  I'm not obligated to send my files to anyone.


----------



## texkam (May 29, 2013)

> And I can edit my pictures and run my photography the way I like. It's really none of your business.


Just curious to what you want from this forum. Oooooos and Ahhhhhhs? I understand that there may be some folks out there that may not know any more than you, but there are many talented members of this community that are willing to help you. Charlie in particular, is being very generous with his time in an effort. 19 posts... If you are willing to spend enough time here you'll learn that several of our member's feedback tend to carry greater technical value. Yes, there are some seasoned pros on here. Meanwhile, I suggest you change your edit status.


----------



## The_Traveler (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> You know what, I'd rather not have your kind of "help."  It's really neither constructive nor helpful.
> I realize they were overexposed.  That happened when I processed them smaller for the web, and I can fix that myself.  I'm not obligated to send my files to anyone.



One month ago you didn't know how f stops worked, now you have this attitude.

No, you're not obligated to send your files, but you will find that it is much more productive to be civil and pleasant even when you think the person you are addressing is being unreasonable.

See, I did it.


----------



## Pallycow (May 29, 2013)

another one bites the dust.

if you just want "atta boys", wrong place. 

when you post photos that are not very good, people will tell you, and tell you why.  which is what was done here.  They were polite and no where near harsh, and from very good photographers who help a lot of people...and certainly not deserving of your rude responses.

reply rudely if you like, I don't care, you won't get help from me...ever.  have a nice day.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

No, I'm willing to hear about how to edit my photos, but it isn't your business how much I charge for my photography or the other particulars of business.  

Thank you to everyone who commented on the photography!

@texkam Why should I change my edit status when you have yours the same?  I'd rather not.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

Non-constructive criticism is irritating sometimes.


----------



## Pallycow (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> That happened when I processed them smaller for the web, and I can fix that myself.



it happened when you pressed the shutter button with incorrect settings for exposure.  So I would say evaluate yourself and your reception to help.


----------



## jowensphoto (May 29, 2013)

Here's some constructive criticism: you seriously need to consider monitor calibration. The first in-color photo on your blog is yellow through and through. The next in-color is orange.

In terms of blogging, think of it as a continuous portfolio. You don't have to put every image from a session on it, nor do you have to blog about every session. There's a lot of good stuff on there, maybe a few great shots, but you've also got quite a bit of "filler" that just doesn't help.

And I'm curious... how is it you went from not knowing about aperture to running a business in a month's time? I'm not being an ass, I'm quite curious.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

Well...I have the original file, and it is not overexposed.  I mean, if anything it was under-exposed.   ​


----------



## Michael79 (May 29, 2013)

I have no critique to offer because I avoid situations like these, but some good people here offered you some good input and valuable time.

Constructive criticism has to be accepted as that.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

@jowensphoto I've had that site from the very beginning, and all of the people I've done pictures for are people I know.  
Photography is a hobby for me, so I'm not dependent on what I make from it like some people.  I can charge for my time and services just like anyone else out there.
Thanks for your tip about the filler!  Oh, and I knew what aperture was, just had it in my mind backwards.


----------



## Pallycow (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> Well...I have the original file, and it is not overexposed.  I mean, if anything it was under-exposed.   ​



Which kinda validates my point.  The shot was underexposed to start (hence my comments in prior post), and in your 'fixing' it made it over exposed.  It's very easy to do, especially when new to processing. I have done it many times, we all have.


----------



## Designer (May 29, 2013)

#1  Should be vertical format.  Face seems overexposed.

#2  You missed the model.  You should have captured her skirt here and not so much out-of focus trees in the background.

#3  Washed out exposure, washed out background commands too much attention.  Good focus on tree bark.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

@Pallycow Yeah, thanks.  I am very happy with how it turned out after I edited it.  You may not like it, that's ok.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

@Designer Yes, I saw that #3 was especially washed out.  I went back to the and redid it, with less exposure.  Before I was trying to get a "milky look" but I'll have to keep working at it.

The funny thing is that #2 is my favorite just the way it is.  Maybe it's just my favorite style. :-/


----------



## jowensphoto (May 29, 2013)

When in doubt about WB, b&w  I like that conversion.


----------



## hopdaddy (May 29, 2013)

OK ,@ Overread, I take back all my thoughts and comments  about "Pre-maturely" locking a thread . This one seems to have been a waste of good time .
   @ the op ,YES you can def do as you please ,but more listening and less defending /offending and you could charge even more. Trust me ,NO ONE wants your photos ,Charlie was simply going to show you what Quality could be pulled from your ......Shots . you can't get details from blown-out jepgs ,the raw files may have enough information to get these by on a low end shoot . Personally ,I would have deleted all three.


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

Good conversion idea, thanks, jowensphoto. 

Also, thank you all of your comments! frommrstomommy, kathythorson, ronlane, timothyjinx, and pisto1981


----------



## pixmedic (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> @Pallycow Yeah, thanks.  I am very happy with how it turned out after I edited it.  You may not like it, that's ok.
> 
> View attachment 46334



while this is a little bit better than the original version you posted, it is still overexposed to the point you lose most of the detail in her face in a big bright patch. 
this was shot at f/2.8 1/640 which let in way too much light. when you have this much ambient light, you need to stop the lens down more or use a faster shutter speed. 
from the looks of the light, you probably should have been more around f/5.6 or f/8 at 1/640th. Since this was shot in aperture priority, you should be checking the cameras meter for proper exposure, using spot meter on her face,  and adjusting your f-stop accordingly.


----------



## Derrel (May 29, 2013)

If a post is deleted by a moderator, please do not re-post the same or similar content.  

Thank-you


----------



## YvetteC (May 29, 2013)

You were given great advice by everyone today. Here is mine: I'm a nurse...I went to school for four years to be able to call myself a nurse. I worked really hard to learn how to blend the science of nursing with the art of adapting and critically thinking through every possible situation. It took years to really learn what I needed to know. Photography is a lot like nursing...you blend an art with a science...it isn't easy...there is a lot to learn. Once you know what you're doing, then you charge for your services. You can argue that if people are willing to pay you then who cares how much skill or experience you have....but you should care. You should take pride in your work and right now, your work just isn't up to par. Charging for this kind of work isn't fair to the real photographers who do everything the right way. If you keep learning and working at it, you will get better but you need to step back and really decide how much effort you are willing to put in.


----------



## tirediron (May 29, 2013)

YvetteC said:


> You were given great advice by everyone today. Here is mine: I'm a nurse...I went to school for four years to be able to call myself a nurse. I worked really hard to learn how to blend the science of nursing with the art of adapting and critically thinking through every possible situation. It took years to really learn what I needed to know. Photography is a lot like nursing...you blend an art with a science...it isn't easy...there is a lot to learn. Once you know what you're doing, then you charge for your services. You can argue that if people are willing to pay you then who cares how much skill or experience you have....but you should care. You should take pride in your work and right now, your work just isn't up to par. Charging for this kind of work isn't fair to the real photographers who do everything the right way. If you keep learning and working at it, you will get better but you need to step back and really decide how much effort you are willing to put in.



*PERFECTLY* put!


----------



## AmeliaP (May 29, 2013)

I have just as much of a right as you do to sell my photography.  My clients are always very happy with my work.
I asked for your thoughts on 3 photos.  Three!  No more, no less.  I didn't ask you to go on my site and judge my photography skills, rates, and business.  
Giving me advice on exposure is one thing, sticking nose in another person's business is another.
I'm gone, this place is ridiculous.


----------



## Pallycow (May 29, 2013)

lol

...and we're done....


----------



## pixmedic (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> I have just as much of a right as you do to sell my photography.  My clients are always very happy with my work.
> I asked for your thoughts on 3 photos.  Three!  No more, no less.  I didn't ask you to go on my site and judge my photography skills, rates, and business.
> Giving me advice on exposure is one thing, sticking nose in another person's business is another.
> I'm gone, this place is ridiculous.



when you take on clients and sell your work you are putting yourself out there as a professional. 
as such, you will get different critique than if you were shooting as a hobbyist. professionals are (and should be) held to a higher standard. 
the fact that your clients can not tell the difference between these photos and properly exposed ones does not lessen the fact that the photos you posted here have serious exposure issues. an experienced professional photographer would likely not have given these to a client.


----------



## YvetteC (May 29, 2013)

AmeliaP said:


> I have just as much of a right as you do to sell my photography.  My clients are always very happy with my work.
> I asked for your thoughts on 3 photos.  Three!  No more, no less.  I didn't ask you to go on my site and judge my photography skills, rates, and business.
> Giving me advice on exposure is one thing, sticking nose in another person's business is another.
> I'm gone, this place is ridiculous.



I don't sell my photography. I'm not good enough yet but I have an endless amount of respect for those who are.


----------



## The_Traveler (May 29, 2013)

Why bother?

Her instinct for self-preservation closes her ears and her mind.
Eventually she'll either learn or get sued.

But who cares?


----------



## pixmedic (May 29, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> Why bother?
> 
> Her instinct for self-preservation closes her ears and her mind.
> Eventually she'll either learn or get sued.
> ...



your right. but part of being on the forum is helping people that want it. 
I guess that only works when people are willing to listen and actually want to improve.


----------



## Pallycow (May 29, 2013)

yup

but guys, everyone is missing it don't ya see?  The title says it all.  geez, stupid noobs trying to help out the people...what's wrong with ya?   

lol


----------



## Tiller (May 29, 2013)

Sometimes I wonder what these kind of people look like in real life.


----------



## Pallycow (May 29, 2013)

coulda been a self portrait for all we know, this is the internet afterall.  lol


----------



## tirediron (May 29, 2013)

And.... I think we're done here.


----------

