Jennifer

[Manfred M]

I finally got around to looking at the shots I took at the MacKenzie King Estate area in Gatineau Park, Quebec. MacKenzie King was Canada's Prime Minister during WW II and had a habit of collecting and erecting ruins on his property.

These shots are of Jennifer. I shot her earlier this summer as well. Lighting was a bit strange so I resorted to camera-mounted fill flash.


#1





#2

[Donald]

McKenzie King

Yes, you called!

I think these are superb portraits

[wilgk]

In another thread, I wasn’t a fan of the clothing with your model in the surroundings.

This time I think it works, the clothes don’t need to be ‘matchy matchy’ but I like them to tone in with the time of day & surrounds.
Too much toward ‘evening’ wear in a daytime shot, detracts & draws attention away from the subject.

In image 1 the stripes on her trousers, work really well with the circles on the hat & the fawn/mustard color in the hat picks up the background.
It’s not a ‘head shot’ so we don’t need to totally separate her from it.
How she is sitting is great, it is often tricky to pose/compose the legs.

In the second her hair colour works well with the bricks.
1 arm across the middle, keeps the attention on her face, which I think is important in this closer shot, with what she is wearing.

If you were to change anything in this one, maybe the single strand of hair coming across her necklace, is all I can think of, as at first I thought 2 necklaces are too much.

[Manfred M]

Kate - the photographer has no choice on the clothes or accessories that the model wears at these shoots. We get to shoot whatever she happens to be wearing. With Jennifer; the only thing she had along that we could change was her hats and of course photographer her with or without it.

The hat itself added a bit of a challenge as that would throw her face into shadow, which is why I pulled out my Speedlight.

Removing the strand of hair, is of course easy.

[Shadowman]

Nice set.

[wilgk]

Thanks Manfred, I didn’t realise that about clothing.
You have worked it in perfectly here.

[FootLoose]

I think the second shot works well with the simpler background and subtle colours in the stonework. I wonder if you could tone down the light on the hand and possibly increase it slightly on her face? The hand seems to be the brighter of two which is particularly noticeable when viewed in lytebox.

[Manfred M]

I think the second shot works well with the simpler background and subtle colours in the stonework. I wonder if you could tone down the light on the hand and possibly increase it slightly on her face? The hand seems to be the brighter of two which is particularly noticeable when viewed in lytebox.

That is in fact how the light was falling. The shot was taken towards the end of golden hour and bits of light were sneaking in between the trees and columns. It's definitely noticeable in the hair highlights as well. I had to tone down the front facing stonework because this part of the image was so bright that it was distracting.

Regardless, here is an updated edit.

[John 2]

Two very nice portraits. Clothing is what it is. What's important for me is that it doesn't distract. It is also all too easy to overdo fill in flash but that is not apparent in these. The light is nicely balanced. The only thought I do have is that in the second, the finger poking her chin is perhaps, a little unnatural but hey ho...…… Nice set.

[MrB]

I think the second shot works well with the simpler background and subtle colours in the stonework. I wonder if you could tone down the light on the hand and possibly increase it slightly on her face? The hand seems to be the brighter of two which is particularly noticeable when viewed in lytebox.

I much prefer the second shot and agree with this from Greg, and with the edit.

The first shot doesn't look quite right to me - the arrangement of the striped trousers (dress?) seems unflattering to her left thigh looking almost inflated, and the OOF foreground plants are a bit distracting.

Philip

[Rufus]

I also preferred the second shot (because of the skin tones and lighting) and the edited version even more. Switching back and forth between the two in Lightbox shows how much of a difference the edit has made, even though it is hardly discernible when they are viewed apart. An object lesson in subtle, localised adjustment. Excellent!

[Manfred M]

David - I have mixed feelings about what I have done here with the two subsequent edits. The shoot was much along the lines of a time for images setting, so the models get shots that they can use in their portfolios.

The shots are just regular portraits. They are not editorial or advertising work, nor are they fine art. As such the amount of work a photographer puts into them is usually very limited, especially if they are part of a package that is being sold to a client. Having spoken to a number of portrait photographers, they generally spend no more than a minute or less on a product if they are planning to make money on it. Even if the image is medium format print, the amount of work will be measured in minutes. A print that sells for around $100 deserves some detailed work.

On the other hand, if the image is being made for the editorial or advertising market, the image could spend hours if not days in post-production. I do know some photographers and retouchers that work in that market niche as well. These are not shots that someone is charging a lot of money for. When the day rate is measured in the $2000 - $3500 range, there is a lot more effort involved.

In my mind the question I always ask myself is how much effort is required to get an acceptable end product. As an amateur photographer, I only spend a lot of time when preparing images for competition and with some limited exception, I rarely work on an image for more than around an hour unless I am trying out some new techniques that I am trying to learn.

[Rufus]

Manfred - you say "In my mind the question I always ask myself is how much effort is required to get an acceptable end product. As an amateur photographer, I only spend a lot of time when preparing images for competition and with some limited exception, I rarely work on an image for more than around an hour unless I am trying out some new techniques that I am trying to learn."

I look forward to the day when I can process an image in minutes because it will mean I know what I am doing! So far I can only do this for holiday snaps.

There are professionals, semi-pros, accomplished amateurs, and then there the likes of me still trying to "see" and capture a half decent image and then still struggling to know how to do the processing it needs to make it presentable.

Of course for the professionals time is money so they have to be very focused and efficient in their workflow. I am a hobbyist and have to try things out because I am still a relative novice.

But really my comment was meant as a compliment for such subtle and effective editing of the type I aspire to. Maybe "object lesson" was the wrong phrase to have used.

[Manfred M]

Manfred - you say "In my mind the question I always ask myself is how much effort is required to get an acceptable end product. As an amateur photographer, I only spend a lot of time when preparing images for competition and with some limited exception, I rarely work on an image for more than around an hour unless I am trying out some new techniques that I am trying to learn."

I look forward to the day when I can process an image in minutes because it will mean I know what I am doing! So far I can only do this for holiday snaps.

There are professionals, semi-pros, accomplished amateurs, and then there the likes of me still trying to "see" and capture a half decent image and then still struggling to know how to do the processing it needs to make it presentable.

Of course for the professionals time is money so they have to be very focused and efficient in their workflow. I am a hobbyist and have to try things out because I am still a relative novice.

But really my comment was meant as a compliment for such subtle and effective editing of the type I aspire to. Maybe "object lesson" was the wrong phrase to have used.

Agreed David - there are several things I try to think about before I comment on an image here (and elsewhere).

The first is the abilities of the poster. This is related to his or her current level as a photographer, whether behind the camera or in post processing. The response needs to address issues at a level that is useful to the photographer.

The second is context - suggestions on improving a snapshot image that is destined for social media will be completely different than one that is a fine art project that will end up as being a print hanging on a wall. That is the one thing we sometimes tend to forget about when commenting on work.

The third is the pedagogical impact. Members and outsiders look at work and comments to supplement their own learning, so the audience is often far broader that the simple conversation between the poster and the respondent.

As for processing an image in minutes. That's all about developing a workflow that works for you and refining it so that you can execute quickly with consistent quality. It's also about working on images that only require a few minutes of edits. I have started preparing five B&W images for a print competition that will be running next May. I expect I will spend around 2 weeks working on them simply because that is the level of effort required to do well. It's all about the context...

Just as an aside, the edits in the second image are mostly done in Photoshop with curves adjustment layers and appropriate layer masks.

[Rufus]

Agreed David - there are several things I try to think about before I comment on an image here (and elsewhere).

The first is the abilities of the poster. This is related to his or her current level as a photographer, whether behind the camera or in post processing. The response needs to address issues at a level that is useful to the photographer.

The second is context - suggestions on improving a snapshot image that is destined for social media will be completely different than one that is a fine art project that will end up as being a print hanging on a wall. That is the one thing we sometimes tend to forget about when commenting on work.

The third is the pedagogical impact. Members and outsiders look at work and comments to supplement their own learning, so the audience is often far broader that the simple conversation between the poster and the respondent.

As for processing an image in minutes. That's all about developing a workflow that works for you and refining it so that you can execute quickly with consistent quality. It's also about working on images that only require a few minutes of edits. I have started preparing five B&W images for a print competition that will be running next May. I expect I will spend around 2 weeks working on them simply because that is the level of effort required to do well. It's all about the context...

I can agree wholeheartedly with all you say here.

Just as an aside, the edits in the second image are mostly done in Photoshop with curves adjustment layers and appropriate layer masks.

You make it sound so simple I regularly use the curves adjustment. My short term aim is to master selections and masks on the basis that in depth knowledge of the various tools are little use without these.

I will keep coming back to CiC for inspiration and to keep learning and add my 2 cents worth as I go.

No need to reply, Manfred, I did not mean to hijack the thread away from Jennifer.