# New to photography and looking for critiques of my work so far...



## Lucidperth (Oct 11, 2017)

Hi everyone,

I bought my first camera in April and have just notched up my 10th shoot. So much to learn but I'm hooked! I'd appreciate any feedback people can give on my shots, I've posted one from each shoot I've done in the order I took them.

Thanks in advance,

Paul


----------



## 480sparky (Oct 11, 2017)

Pick one or two for us to critique.


----------



## Cody'sCaptures (Oct 11, 2017)

Nice progression! May I ask, where/how did you get these shoots set-up? I'm still so un-confident on my work, still too afraid to reach out to people. Suppose you just gotta rip off the band-aid at some point


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 11, 2017)

Cody'sCaptures said:


> Nice progression! May I ask, where/how did you get these shoots set-up? I'm still so un-confident on my work, still too afraid to reach out to people. Suppose you just gotta rip off the band-aid at some point



I joined a few Facebook pages and use StarNow, I find StarNow a great resource, every time I have posted an idea for a shoot on there I have had at least 40 applications. Thanks for your comment ☺


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 11, 2017)

480sparky said:


> Pick one or two for us to critique.



Ah ok, sorry I wasn't sure how this worked. The last two are my most recent shots so any advice there would be great, thanks.


----------



## Cody'sCaptures (Oct 11, 2017)

Both look like slightly missed focus... The silhouette might just have gotten soft with noise reduction?   The beach shot perhaps too shallow dof and is overexposed a bit. I really like the posing overall


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 11, 2017)

Cody'sCaptures said:


> Both look like slightly missed focus... The silhouette might just have gotten soft with noise reduction?   The beach shot perhaps too shallow dof and is overexposed a bit. I really like the posing overall



Thanks Cody...in the original silhouette image the windows were dirty and you could see the building behind, through increasing shadowing and exposure I may have lost some sharpness from the shot. 
I also agree that in the beach shot if I'd closed the aperture a little it would have resulted in a better lit shot and a deeper depth of field.
I appreciate the advice ☺


----------



## Designer (Oct 11, 2017)

Lucidperth said:


> I bought my first camera in April and have just notched up my 10th shoot.





Lucidperth said:


> I joined a few Facebook pages and use StarNow, I find StarNow a great resource, every time I have posted an idea for a shoot on there I have had at least 40 applications.


So are these people paying you?  Are your subjects pleased/satisfied with the results?   Are you presenting yourself as a professional photographer?  Do you have any specific questions on any of these?


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 11, 2017)

Designer said:


> Lucidperth said:
> 
> 
> > I bought my first camera in April and have just notched up my 10th shoot.
> ...



Thanks for your reply Designer. I haven't been paid for any of the shoots, they were all done with new or fairly new models on a TF basis for portfolio building. I'm definitely not presenting myself as a professional, it's not something I'm looking to do as a career, maybe a part time thing if I ever get to a high enough standard.
The subjects seemed pleased with the results, but they were all relatively new to modelling so didn't have much basis for comparison.
I guess I'm looking for any guidance about things I'm doing right or wrong, and obvious mistakes that beginners make, or any simple changes I should be aware of for future shoots.


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Oct 11, 2017)

You have great timing on the last shot ( the surf is just _almost _at her hand ) but it does seem a little overexposed to me on my laptop which I have not calibrated. I really like the pose of the one prior to that. It is just a bit dark.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 11, 2017)

Overall, I see a lack of depth of field on these shots; in my opinion, most of these would be made better if there were more depth of field,meaning more of the entire person shown in sharp,clear,crisp focus.


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 11, 2017)

Dean_Gretsch said:


> You have great timing on the last shot ( the surf is just _almost _at her hand ) but it does seem a little overexposed to me on my laptop which I have not calibrated. I really like the pose of the one prior to that. It is just a bit dark.



Thanks Dean, it's a great point you make about the exposure, when editing I'm not sure at what screen brightness to adjust exposure. So I put it at 50% brightness (I have a Macbook Pro), this clearly isn't the right way to do it as a few people have mentioned the exposure on this shot. I actually was trying to create a silhouette effect in the window shot, I purposely didn't make it a complete silhouette so that the shot had more depth to it, there must be a better way to execute the shot but at my skill level I'm not sure what that is!


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 11, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Overall, I see a lack of depth of field on these shots; in my opinion, most of these would be made better if there were more depth of field,meaning more of the entire person shown in sharp,clear,crisp focus.



Thanks Derrel, the depth of field is something I found hard to judge. In the studio shots on a neutral background there is obviously no requirement. In the graffiti shot I wanted the grafitti to be clear and visable, obviously as you say that takes the focus away from the model slightly. The guitar and beach shot was hard because they were right against the background making DoF impossible (I assume), however with the rest I definitely agree a shallower depth of field would have enhanced the model.


----------



## 480sparky (Oct 11, 2017)

Lucidperth said:


> Thanks Dean, it's a great point you make about the exposure, when editing I'm not sure at what screen brightness to adjust exposure. So I put it at 50% brightness (I have a Macbook Pro), this clearly isn't the right way to do it as a few people have mentioned the exposure on this shot. I actually was trying to create a silhouette effect in the window shot, I purposely didn't make it a complete silhouette so that the shot had more depth to it, there must be a better way to execute the shot but at my skill level I'm not sure what that is!



You need to calibrate your monitor.


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 11, 2017)

480sparky said:


> Lucidperth said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Dean, it's a great point you make about the exposure, when editing I'm not sure at what screen brightness to adjust exposure. So I put it at 50% brightness (I have a Macbook Pro), this clearly isn't the right way to do it as a few people have mentioned the exposure on this shot. I actually was trying to create a silhouette effect in the window shot, I purposely didn't make it a complete silhouette so that the shot had more depth to it, there must be a better way to execute the shot but at my skill level I'm not sure what that is!
> ...



Awesome thanks 480, I'll do a google search and do that today!


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Oct 11, 2017)

480sparky said:


> Lucidperth said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Dean, it's a great point you make about the exposure, when editing I'm not sure at what screen brightness to adjust exposure. So I put it at 50% brightness (I have a Macbook Pro), this clearly isn't the right way to do it as a few people have mentioned the exposure on this shot. I actually was trying to create a silhouette effect in the window shot, I purposely didn't make it a complete silhouette so that the shot had more depth to it, there must be a better way to execute the shot but at my skill level I'm not sure what that is!
> ...



I hate to ask a question on someone else's thread, but is there a _*type*_ of monitor that works best ( please don't say calibrated lol ) for photographic work? I know angles of viewing affect many nuances of an image so am I to assume a laptop is _not _ideal?


----------



## Designer (Oct 11, 2017)

Lucidperth said:


> I guess I'm looking for any guidance about things I'm doing right or wrong, and obvious mistakes that beginners make, or any simple changes I should be aware of for future shoots.


I will attempt to give an abbreviated critique due to so many photographs in one thread.  Since you didn't number them, I will assign numbers beginning with the top of the column.

1. Framing, white balance.
2. Distracting background.
3. Frame, composition, exposure.
4. Exposure.
5. Lighting, background.
6. Frame, exposure.
7. Composition, frame.
8. Exposure, editing.
9. Very good!
10. Exposure.

BTW: for your depth of field, you can calculate that before the shot.  Actually, I use a DOF calculator that you can find online for free.  (DOF Master)  The DOF does matter, whether you choose to make it deep or shallow as  your own creative expression.  I much prefer to see portraiture with enough DOF to include the entire subject, which can greatly enhance a person's portrait.  You get the best separation by getting the subject entirely in focus, and throwing the foreground and background out of focus.  I did not evaluate focus on these 10 shots.


----------



## Dave442 (Oct 11, 2017)

Looking at the images and also at how Designer noted the items shows that you improved in the Framing/Composition aspects.  That is good to see. The exposure and focusing issues you can work on any time and don't need to have a model for that.


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 12, 2017)

Designer said:


> Lucidperth said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I'm looking for any guidance about things I'm doing right or wrong, and obvious mistakes that beginners make, or any simple changes I should be aware of for future shoots.
> ...





Dave442 said:


> Looking at the images and also at how Designer noted the items shows that you improved in the Framing/Composition aspects.  That is good to see. The exposure and focusing issues you can work on any time and don't need to have a model for that.



Thanks guys, it seems lighting and exposure is the area I really need to work on. Have a few shoots coming up so I'll remember the points everyone has bought up.


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 12, 2017)

I think you misunderstood Derrel's comments.  He is saying to have more in focus, not less.


----------



## Designer (Oct 12, 2017)

Lucidperth said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Overall, I see a lack of depth of field on these shots; in my opinion, most of these would be made better if there were more depth of field,meaning more of the entire person shown in sharp,clear,crisp focus.
> ...


I believe I detect a misunderstanding of terminology.  

Depth of field (DOF) does not automatically imply a shallow depth of field, as some newbies crave, but rather the CORRECT depth of field.  

IOW: The photographer decides what needs to be in proper focus, and sets the parameters to yield the depth of field that he wants. 

"DOF" does not mean "blur the background" (no matter what the background is or where it is).


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 12, 2017)

SquarePeg said:


> I think you misunderstood Derrel's comments.  He is saying to have more in focus, not less.



Ah ok, sorry, yes I did misunderstand the comment. So ideally I need to be using more focal points on certain shots to expand the focus area.
These are all great comments, thanks guys. I have 3 shoots coming up in the next couple of weeks, 2 of which are definitely going to challenge me so I'll take all these points on board.


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 12, 2017)

You could stop down the lens to get more dof


----------



## Derrel (Oct 12, 2017)

SquarePeg said:


> I think you misunderstood Derrel's comments.  He is saying to have more in focus, not less.



Yes...you have a number of shots where there is a focus issue from having shot at too wide of a lens opening, like the very first shot...

Try working at f/5.6 or f/6.3 or f/7.1, and see how dramatically that aperture range can improve your final images when the photos are shot under brighter lighting conditions outdoors, or with flash.

I am most emphatically suggesting that having *more that is *in-focus leads to better people pictures on these types of photos.


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 13, 2017)

Derrel said:


> SquarePeg said:
> 
> 
> > I think you misunderstood Derrel's comments.  He is saying to have more in focus, not less.
> ...



That's great advice Derrel, thanks. I have been opening up the aperture for the lighting I required, however I'll try shooting at f5.6 and adjusting the exposure in photoshop if required. I would drop the shutter speed down but I'd be worried about blurring then.


----------



## Designer (Oct 13, 2017)

Lucidperth said:


> Ah ok, sorry, yes I did misunderstand the comment. So ideally I need to be using more focal points on certain shots to expand the focus area.



No.  

Using more focus points will not increase your depth of field.

What we have here is a failure to communicate.  May I suggest that you do some independent reading on the principles and terminology of photography?  I'm sure you will benefit greatly by understanding the basics.



Lucidperth said:


> .. I'll try shooting at f5.6 and adjusting the exposure in photoshop if required.


No again.  

Please don't do that.  

Strive to get a proper exposure in the camera.  Do not rely on Photoshop tricks to compensate for a lack of basic understanding.  If you attempt to fix bad photographs in Photoshop, but lack the skills of an expert, you will not succeed in making a good final image.  It will always look "Photoshopped".


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 13, 2017)

Designer said:


> Lucidperth said:
> 
> 
> > Ah ok, sorry, yes I did misunderstand the comment. So ideally I need to be using more focal points on certain shots to expand the focus area.
> ...



So if the ambient lighting is not appropriate for f5.6-f7.1 then do I need to adjust shutter speed and hope no blur occurs? Sorry, this is a massive newbie question but exposure and lighting seems to be the area I need to work on!


----------



## SCraig (Oct 13, 2017)

Lucidperth said:


> So if the ambient lighting is not appropriate for f5.6-f7.1 then do I need to adjust shutter speed and hope no blur occurs? Sorry, this is a massive newbie question but exposure and lighting seems to be the area I need to work on!


You have three choices; aperture, shutter speed, and ISO.  In any situation you have to decided which of the three is most important to the shot and which is least important.  If you need to hold your aperture you can adjust your ISO and/or shutter speed.  If you need to hold your shutter speed you can adjust aperture and/or ISO.

To maintain a proper exposure you will nearly always have to trade off something and it can be any combination of those three elements, which is why it is frequently referred to as the "Exposure Triangle".  Just like any other triangle if you change one leg or angle you will have to change at least one of the others to compensate.


----------



## Designer (Oct 13, 2017)

Lucidperth said:


> So if the ambient lighting is not appropriate for f5.6-f7.1 then do I need to adjust shutter speed and hope no blur occurs?





SCraig said:


> You have three choices; aperture, shutter speed, and ISO.



You have another option: Add light.  (Or in some cases, subtract light.)

Considering there are some variables, and when you factor in yet another; the photographer's vision, (the intended resultant effect) he/she has to be ready to make adjustments to any variable.

So now let's try to break it down: I believe the example under consideration was the boudoir shot.  (?) You have the window light which you want to use for mood.  You have the window light reflecting off the ceiling and walls.  You have a live model, for which you need a certain minimum shutter speed.  You have a desired DOF (the space in which the model occupies).  The camera, the lens, and the distance, (both model-to-lens, and model-to-background), all of which you have already selected.

Start by making a mental note of your minimum shutter speed (the maximum time it is open), but don't set that a first.  Figure the aperture needed to produce the desired DOF (have a tape measure with you, and a portable DOF calculator).

Make a light meter reading on your model, or use your camera's built-in meter.  Make whatever adjustments you can to produce a good exposure, making note of your minimums and maximums vis-a-vis the shutter and aperture.  If you can't get a good exposure, dig out a speedlight and start figuring out how you want the light to look.  (i.e.: direct, diffused direct, bounced, etc.)

In a shot like that, I hope you have planned to use your tripod, because you'll want to use it regardless of the shutter speed.


----------



## SCraig (Oct 13, 2017)

Designer said:


> You have another option: Add light.  (Or in some cases, subtract light.)


You are exactly right.  I omitted that option, thanks for pointing it out.


----------



## Lucidperth (Oct 13, 2017)

Thanks again everyone, there's a lot of information to take in there. I didn't realise how far off being good the shots I have taken actually are. Fortunately I do have a few shoots coming up, so the opportunity is there to practice the points you have raised. In the meantime I'll definitely read into the principles of lighting and photography terminology to try and improve. Hopefully with the points you've bought up you'll see an improvement in the next shots I post!


----------

