Kellany

[Dave A]

Kellany, my 9 year old niece. She loves having her picture taken and I like the practice I get in taking portraits.....which I need.

Dave




1.





2.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Dave,

I am no expert and have little portrait experience myself, but analysing and critiquing other's shots and also reading what the more experienced members contribute does help me a lot. So since this thread has been up a while and several have viewed and no-one has commented yet, I'll take the plunge.

I hope you do not become discouraged by the number of points I raise, I am just thinking out loud and bear in mind that my analysis may be flawed and/or assumptions incorrect.

Neither is particularly working for me as 'portraits' due to a combination of factors; pose/expression, lighting, background, shooting distance.

Starting with the shooting distance first, when viewing the two, I was surprised when I saw the EXIF data, that both were shot at 42mm (equivalent to 63 mm if shot on Full Frame) - I was sure that the second was a longer focal length and you'd consequently shot from further back, although I guess you might have - and cropped this one more in PP.

Anyway, the point I'm (slowly) getting too is that the close shooting distance encouraged by the 42 mm (when your lens could go to 140 mm) has led to the on camera flash exhibiting quite a fall off of light between Kellany's face and shoulders in the first. It also arguably makes her head appear somewhat larger due to the perspective.

Whereas in the second, where if anything, her shoulder may be closer to the lens (and flash) than her face, the opposite is almost true.

In #1, it looks like you had to do some serious highlight recovery/dimming on the background and I think there's a slight halo around her right shoulder as a result (although it could just be natural effect of vegetation patches on sand). I'd suggest a vignette would have worked well on this shot to control the brightness of the sky and left hand side.

Ditto for #2 with vignette - as I find her shoulder and neck competing with her face due to their relative brightnesses - and the brightly coloured, sharply defined patterned costume doesn't help either.

Regarding pose and expression, the 'stare' in #1 at something we can't see above the camera isn't vacant enough to be wistful, it kinda just looks like an accident of timing clicking the shutter.

In #2, I find her eyes just a little too closed.

The light, being on camera, is quite 'flat', although shadows are not too sharp edged, did you use some kind of diffuser?

I appreciate you're after portrait practice and you generally have to work with the 'available subjects', especially if they enjoy it, however I'm thinking that 9 years old is possibly a bit too young to be portrait 'posing' unless the photographer knows exactly what to ask for (as in "chin up, rotate your neck left a bit, a bit more please, thank you" and by the time you've done that, her eyes may not be 'engaging' with the camera/viewer), but I may be 'over-thinking' it.


What I have learnt from this analysis is that in a similar situation, better portrait lighting might have been achieved with the subject some six feet or more under the pier, while the camera is almost outside, shooting at 45 degrees inwards, so her background is darker and her face lit by natural light coming from a defined direction which would provide some 'modelling'. Don't use flash (if on-camera is only option, or use it a stop below ambient as a fill only), but be wary of subject movement during exposures.

Perhaps at this age it would be better to shoot candid shots while the subject(s) enjoy themselves running about and playing.

Just another Dave

[Dave A]

Thank you Dave for your comments. After reading your comments while comparing them to the images I can see what you are talking about.
Good points for me to remember for next time. I was using a SB700 on camera with an 8" diffuser and as you suspected #2 is cropped about 60%.

Dave

[rpcrowe]

Your niece has devastatingly beautiful eves which show up well in your portraits. She's going to be a man-killer later in life.

I go along with Dave's comments... I virtually never shoot head and shoulders portraits at less than 70mm (I can say this with assurance since my go-to portrait lens is the 70-200mm f/4L IS) on a 1.6x crop camera. I mostly shoot at focal lengths greater than 100mm (160mm equivalent). These focal lengths ensure that I am a shooting from far enough so than there tends to be little or no perspective distortion.

I try not to have a portion of the person's body remarkably closer to the lens than their face/head. That way the portion of the body doesn't loom larger than the rest of the person. Bending forward with the head closer to the camera tends to show the head larger than the body it sits on. Additionally, when using flash, there is often significant fall-off at the further distances.

I tend to try (unless, I am concentrating on a backlit portrait) to have my background not significantly brighter than the subject. I also try not to have strong verticals in the background...

I shot this portrait beneath a pier at Oceanside, California. I used the stone foundation of the pier as a background. I shot this using a Canon 7D2 with a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens at 135mm (216mm equivalent). My flash was a Canon 600EX RT on a camera flip bracket (allowing the flash to remain over the lens when I am shooting in the portrait configuration). I modified the light using a small softbox (9-inches square) which incorporates an internal baffle for softer light.

Note: when I am using the 70-200mm lens, I usually attach my camera to the flash bracket. However, when I am using my heavier and longer 100-400mm Mark-II lens, I use the tripod collar to attach the rig to the flash bracket.

I will also, often use the Joe Demb Flash Diffuser Professional to modify my flash as in this portrait which was done using a 7D camera with my 70-200mm lens at 169mm (270.4mm equivalent)...

This one was done at dusk outside under a tree with the flash in bounce position and the FlipIt reflector portion of the Flash Diffuser Professional pointed at a 45 degree angle towards my subject - to better reflect the bounced light forward. The setting sun provided a bit of back lighting...

I shot this semi back-lit portrait using the 7D2 and my 100-400mm Mark-2 lens at 160mm...

I used my 600EX RT flash on the camera flip bracket with the 9-inch softbox for fill light. This time I had the camera/lens mounted to the bracket using the lens' tripod ring.

[Dave A]

Thank you Richard for taking the time to explain your procedures and setups. This will certainly help me to improve as I work on my technique.

Dave

[Shadowman]

Nicely done.

[Stagecoach]

I'm sure that Kellany will be pleased with these Dave.

Perhaps one of the things we should consider in this type of photograph is our we taking the pictures for the 9 year old or for ourselves?