# For Him



## Maitha Mazrouei (Aug 25, 2007)

I Used Nikon D40
Nikor 18-55mm
Adobe Photoshop 

*Be critical, but kind*


----------



## jsmharley (Aug 26, 2007)

My opinion and 10 cents will get you a piece of bubble gum, with that Looks to me the background is super bright, and I would remove the weed in front of the label. Makes it hard to read the entire bottle front.


----------



## TCimages (Aug 26, 2007)

I would consider a less a destracting back ground.  It takes away from the focus.  The product doesn't really stands out.  If you want the outdoor feeling, maybe you coculd use a slightly blurred landscape or even trees.


----------



## Maitha Mazrouei (Aug 26, 2007)

jsmharley said:


> My opinion and 10 cents will get you a piece of bubble gum, with that Looks to me the background is super bright, and I would remove the weed in front of the label. Makes it hard to read the entire bottle front.



thnx alot for ur opinion believe me it means alot . . .  I try to take another shot for the same product


----------



## Maitha Mazrouei (Aug 26, 2007)

TCimages said:


> I would consider a less a destracting back ground.  It takes away from the focus.  The product doesn't really stands out.  If you want the outdoor feeling, maybe you coculd use a slightly blurred landscape or even trees.



sure for the next shot i'll keep ur note in ma mind


----------



## glaston (Aug 28, 2007)

What is the intent of this?

Are you building a portfolio and want to focus on product shots? Or is it just for experience?

Coincidentally, I'm doing a cologne shot myself right now.
But it will be a hybrid project where the product is totally synthetic (3D generated) and comp'd in to BG. 
It's also a fictional product because I'm creating a portfolio to show off product photography in hopes of getting into advertising photography and conceptualization.

I did quite a bit of research on the subject.
What I found was that it's best to shoot against a standard background, not a outdoor or staged environment.
Just a monochrome backdrop with the bottle standing upright, showing the different sizes the cologne comes in. Possibly with some objects in frame that pertain to the theme of the product in some way.
Another option is to shoot it on what looks like a perfume department case with a high DOF so the product pops out.

In your image, the background is much too busy, the product is slanted, the label is obstructed and there's nothing else related to the subject in frame.

These are big 'no-no's' in advertisements.

If you don't want to do a standard shot with a simple background, try taking a shot of the cologne bottle, then some sort of photo that relates to it, then comp the cologne in to the side or bottom of the image.
For example, Nautica cologne always used some sort of scene with a guy, a girl, and in the BG is a sailboat or boat docks. 
The bottle isn't actually in the scene, it's against a studio BG and comp'd in on the side of the photo as to not distract the viewer but to emphasize how the scene relates to the product.

I'm just using a monochrome gradient BG with no reflections or specular, a speckled floor with nice reflections, a unique appearance for the bottle glass material, a couple of BG objects to bring out the DOF and some exaggerated creative lighting to bring the viewers eye to the product.

I'm not saying you should do it like I do, just saying to keep it very simple, aesthetically pleasing, with focus on the product.
Since after all, were this for an actual ad, you're showcasing a product so it should be the center of attention.


----------



## Christie Photo (Aug 28, 2007)

glaston said:


> Since after all, were this for an actual ad, you're showcasing a product so it should be the center of attention.



If it was for a "actual ad," all this would have been decided long before it goes to photography.

-Pete


----------



## Maitha Mazrouei (Aug 28, 2007)

glaston said:


> What is the intent of this?
> 
> Are you building a portfolio and want to focus on product shots? Or is it just for experience?
> 
> ...



oh dude thnx alot for ur advise . . well i took this shot just for experience . . . and it seems that i failed  but of course i'll keep your notes in my mind  . .  i have another two shots  . .  and i really want to know your opinion cause you have a knowledge  and i wanna learn from you


----------



## glaston (Aug 28, 2007)

> If it was for a "actual ad," all this would have been decided long before it goes to photography.


 Of course. But it's not as if the gods of ad photography send down a set of stone tablets declaring the logistics for the shot.

If he wants a job, and is building a portfolio which it seems she is, it makes sense to show work that reflects her abilities in what she wants to do.
Wouldn't do much good to show work that has nothing to do with the area of study she's trying to pursue.
If the OP is familiar with the way they do things in ads, then she has an advantage. As opposed to just doing things freestyle and getting used to that, then being totally restricted in what she can do because her focus was on something that she isn't using.



> and it seems that i failed.


 I wouldn't go so far as to say you failed.
Your intent was to gain experience and you're doing that.

I'm checking out your flickr photos. You got some style going on there.
You'll most likely do very well in whatever you choose.


----------

