# Model Testing - Chris Hernandez



## m.shalaby (Sep 16, 2011)

Chris and I met up to do some testing together and add shots to both of our portfolios.  Timing was thrown off a bit (last minute casting on his end) and the shoot got started late really late actually.  These images below look like they were done in studio with black seamless, right?  Nope!  We started shooting basically at dusk, right on into night.  We didn't have much time together and it was kind of a rushed shoot at that point.   I wish we had more, because he's a heck of a talent.  Whatever I asked for, he gave me.  Cool and Mr. Chill - bam!  Bold and direct - done!  Dark and mysterious - take the shot!  All right on the spot.

I traveled about an hour to meet up with him, and I didnt want to waste the shoot completely.  So I had a lets just get whatever we can get attitude about it.  So due to the shooting conditions, this is all we really got, among a few others.  Thank God for the passing cars headlights without them, I wasnt able to auto focus with my 5D!






















































Gear: 5D Mark II | 35L | 430ExII Speedlite | 36" Octabox w/ Grid


----------



## KBM1016 (Sep 16, 2011)

I'm not really sure I like #3.  My attention really goes to his crotch.  Maybe if the shot was taken less direct on then it wouldn't emphasize it as much.  Maybe a few more inches to the your right.  Either that or he could move his foot more to your left so it's not head on.


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 16, 2011)

Beautiful clean sharp shots and, except for the dark eye-sockets, could easily envision these as adverts.
I like #3 the most, dynamic pose that matches the aspect ratio.
Beautiful conversions, very pro look to all of these.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 16, 2011)

I have seen many of your posts. I have only one comment and suggestion to you: you are consistently framing far too tightly at the top of the frame in almost all of your pictures. It is really hurting your images. None of these have ANY cropping room, and all are crowding the edges of the frame, and not in a good way. Except for the poor framing, there's little for me to say in regard to your photography--you seem to have the technical aspects of quality photography well under control. As far as these as "advertising" photos...the horizontal compositions, framed tightly at the top, make the images not nearly as desirable as properly-framed verticals would be, with some room for the subject's head. Not many magazine ads will be run double-truck, so the horizontal framings show an unawareness of the needs of most fashion editors, either in print or on-line...single-person fashion is almost always shown "tall", and with some top space, so the head is not visually slamming in to the top of the frame. I hope you can take this post the right way, without freaking out or complaining about me being too hard on you.


----------



## m.shalaby (Sep 17, 2011)

Derrel said:


> I have seen many of your posts. I have only one comment and suggestion to you: you are consistently framing far too tightly at the top of the frame in almost all of your pictures. It is really hurting your images. None of these have ANY cropping room, and all are crowding the edges of the frame, and not in a good way. Except for the poor framing, there's little for me to say in regard to your photography--you seem to have the technical aspects of quality photography well under control. As far as these as "advertising" photos...the horizontal compositions, framed tightly at the top, make the images not nearly as desirable as properly-framed verticals would be, with some room for the subject's head. Not many magazine ads will be run double-truck, so the horizontal framings show an unawareness of the needs of most fashion editors, either in print or on-line...single-person fashion is almost always shown "tall", and with some top space, so the head is not visually slamming in to the top of the frame. I hope you can take this post the right way, without freaking out or complaining about me being too hard on you.



lol... you make a valid point about your opinion. i'm not going to freak out, haha.  this is the way C&C is supposed to be given, and i respect you for that.  some would just say "the cropping sucks!"  as i've seen on these forums.  as if they want to give c&c, but then halfway through get bored and just write one quick sentance...  like i said, thanks for your input.  

what i'll do is go back to the RAW and loosen it up a bit, compare, and try to see where your coming from (althought I have already cropped these 12 times (tighter/looser) as per my LR history.  so it seems my artistic eye told me tighter was better.

you feel they are cropped too tight. its your personal feeling and opinion.
i personally feel they are cropped just perfect right now - but even my opinions change on my work and i go back and change things.  

matter of taste, no right or wrong here. no debate... just opinions - thanks for your input.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Sep 17, 2011)

You didnt have on camera flash to help you with focusing?


----------



## m.shalaby (Sep 17, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> You didnt have on camera flash to help you with focusing?



No.  No on camera flash, shot off camera manual flash


----------



## Robin Usagani (Sep 17, 2011)

I know.. It is always good to have one on camera to help you with focusing for us Canon users lol.


----------



## Laika (Sep 18, 2011)

Very nice!

The model works excellent for these. I really like all of them. I wish number one wasnt so tightly framed, and I do not like that he is cropped off at his wrists. Number one still is my favorite though. It is simple, and just seems to come from another era.


----------



## bruce282 (Sep 19, 2011)

A question if I might. The subject is centered in all the shots. Is this a case where the "rule of thirds" is made to be broken? I ask because I  am running through a mental checklist when composing shots and the rule of thirds is the first thing I try and apply.

Bruce


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 19, 2011)

The rule of thirds isn't compulsory.  It is only a guide on placing the important objects within the frame and the nature of the image really determines best placement. Generally it means that, unless some other factor of the composition is more important, that humans see items at the 'thirds' as more important.


----------

