Little cook in action

[nas-matko]

HI, I am back again with another project I need help with.

I was trying to create a portrait of little cook in action, however, if the cook is looking on the knife, spoon etc its more natural, because we tend to look at what we are doing, but than I can't see her eyes. (second picture)
If she is looking into camera, its more portrait, but looks unnatural for the reasons mentioned above (first picture).

How to balance this?

Technical aspect: I used one flash in octabox, 50mm fixed lens, Canon R7 body, ISO 100, 1/200s and I think f3.5. No postprocessing other than camera raw adjustments and removal of wrinkles from background and of course some sharpening.

 

[cgw]

For starters, is there any way you can re-shoot in a kitchen with natural light?

 

[smoke665]

Welcome back, since you only asked for advise on the pose (looking at camera or looking at work), I'm limiting my comments to only your question.

To answer the question, you first have to, decide "what" you want ...Portrait or Environmental, because as you've illustrated in the images, I'm not sure you can have both. A portrait, is the representation of a person, in which the face is always predominant. In an Environmental, the action going on is predominant, and the person secondary.

The first one is engaging with the eyes, but cropping off the top of the hat, and the vertical subject with the tilted table is creating a cramped tumultuous image. In the second I like the fact that you've shown a good environmental, but it could stand some leveling, and a tad more room at the top, so it doesn't look like she's about to knock her hat off.

 

[nas-matko]

For starters, is there any way you can re-shoot in a kitchen with natural light?

Unfortunately not, natural light in that room is unsatisfactory.

 

[nas-matko]

Portrait or Environmental, because as you've illustrated in the images, I'm not sure you can have both.

So there is nothing like a portrait in the enviroment? Or perhaps there is, but can't be mimicking action, must be something static in the environment, correct?

cropping off the top of the hat, and the vertical subject with the tilted table is creating a cramped tumultuous image

I see your point, it happened during the "heat of the moment", since I had fixed lens, I came closer but didn't have time to think about composition. There is noting I can do about it now maybe generative AI can create new hat, but I don't like this kind of "edits".

could stand some leveling, and a tad more room at the top,

This is easy fix, thanks for pointing out these technical problems too, although it was not my direct question. Tight cropping seems to be my perpetual problem.

 

[smoke665]

So there is nothing like a portrait in the enviroment? Or perhaps there is, but can't be mimicking action, must be something static in the environment, correct?

Refer back to my earlier comment. Within any image you need one focal point that acts as an anchor for the viewer's eye. In this scene you have two different points of interest/focal points (person or action in the scene) that could become a focal point. Choosing one or the other will change what has the most prominance to the viewer, and de-emphasis the other.

Leveling the table in the last makes this the better of the two as shot. For the future, you might consider:
1. Moving the pot and other items in closer proximity and switching to a portrait orientation to give more intimacy to the scene.
2. While the shallow DOF isn't overly objectionable, in a portrait my preference is to have sufficient DOF to capture the tip of the nose to the front of the ear, on the average adult that's 3.5-4". When you have a set with both subject and other static objects, your DOF becomes a matter of how much you want in focus, which is also dependent on if you are shooting a portrait or environmental shot.

 

[nas-matko]

Thanks for your valuable comments. I find a way to fix that first image without using AI, I simply took a hat from another shot and pasted it there and I have leveled it. Do you think it has helped it a bit?
You have a very good point about portrait orientation. I have another shot from the same session like this, but again, struggling between action and proper face imaging.

 

[smoke665]

@nas-matko I like it. She's engaging the camera, and there's less distractions. You don't seem to have a problem catching focus, but your limited DOF is creating a softness in the eyes. I've always believed that the eyes were the windows to the soul, get them tack sharp and everything else falls in place.

One other comment for the future. One light setups make it hard to control shadow transitions. Try using a white reflector/reflectors opposite your strobe to move light into the shadows. One high and one low camera right will soften the shadows under the chin and around the eye. When metering I prefer a 2:1 ratio with a female subject, on a standard portrait shots, 4:1 to add more drama.

Your showing significant improvement since your first posting!

 

[nas-matko]

Your showing significant improvement since your first posting!

You are too kind, but I really appreciate this comment and all your help you are providing to everybody here.

your limited DOF is creating a softness in the eyes

Normally I take portraits at f8, but in this case I was trying to get rid of those blo.... wrinkles, but unsuccessfully and I now have this softnes in the eyes side effect.

 

[smoke665]

You are too kind, but I really appreciate this comment and all your help you are providing to everybody here.

Normally I take portraits at f8, but in this case I was trying to get rid of those blo.... wrinkles, but unsuccessfully and I now have this softnes in the eyes side effect.

I believe critique emphasis should be on both positive and negative.

Ideally you need at least 6', (more if available) from the background. I realize that sometimes that isn't possible. Using a neutral gray paper in those cases is a good option.

 

[cgw]

Probably unwelcome now but a few parting ideas. There's near-zero context. Cooks cook in kitchens--where's the environment? Guess I own too many cookbooks whose authors are typically shot in a space that looks right--not at blank tables with a few pots and pans. The flash lighting, as smoke665 kindly noted, is problematic for lack of transitions. Ratios take time and practice to nail.That said, the obvious care taken to realize your ideas remains obvious. Your concept, model choice, and willingness to listen to other views all work in your favor. Good work!

 

[nas-matko]

Cooks cook in kitchens--where's the environment?

That's true, but this is studio shot, not sure how to put it into real context other than trying to paste some background, which is difficult to make it look right.

Ratios take time and practice to nail.

Yes, I am well aware of that, but I am still trying to learn also thank people like you and smoke665.

 

[smoke665]

@nas-matko I pretty much shoot everything in front of an 18% gray background. By varying the reflective reading between the background and the subject I can make it appear from pure black to pure white. Using the overlay blend mode with this method makes it quick to swap out a background. Digital Backgrounds? Ditch the Green, and go Gray!

 

[nas-matko]

Just some ideas for the future.

Its strange, in notification email I can see posted picture and comment, here I see only this one sentence, why is that?

 

[cgw]

Copyright issue with the image. This hopefully is OK:

Alison Roman’s “Nothing Fancy” and the Art of the Unpretentious Dinner Party

Lots of cookbooks promise to help you entertain with ease, but “Nothing Fancy” makes that idea briny, tangy, funky, and a little polarizing.

www.newyorker.com

This seems to me a good example of an environmental shot. I'm guessing big diffused light on her right--the shadows of the stove-top kettle and sauce pan on the fridge on the far right hint at that. Decoding lighting set-ups is always interesting!