Portraits : Jade

[Chataignier]

Jade, reputed to have the best eyes in Limoges :

#1




#2




#3




#4

[lovelife65]

While I am not a professional, nor do I take portraits I can say I really like these. Too often the models in portraits look so over processed and un-natural to the point of looking plastic. Here, you haven't pushed them so far, and the textures look wonderful. I don't know her skin tone but the first and second, the tones appear different.

I'm not sure about cutting off her elbow in #2,3, and if that is considered a no go

Very nicely done.

[Manfred M]

David - in future, would you mind either giving the images a title or numbering them when you post multiple images? It makes it easier to identify each image when commenting that way. I've gone and numbered them.

I'm not loving the lighting here and in general I'm not 100% sold on the poses. How did you light your model; my guess is that you are using small light sources here? I find the lighting a bit hard. Based on the other images you have posted I can see that you are an experienced photographer, so the points I am making are rather picky.


#1 - I find that this is the strongest of the four images. Nice pose but there are some fairly harsh shadows, the skin is a bit patchy looking and a few strange looking hot spots. There is good separation of your model's hair from the background. The catch lights give your model's eyes some life.

#2 - Again issues of some strange shadows (hair and piercing) from a hard light source. The face looks a bit uneven and patchy. She is looking very much to the camera left side of the frame, so the whites of her eyes, especially the camera right one is a bit distracting. It would be nice to have a bit more separation between the hair and the background on the camera left side.

The hand pose is a bit awkward; in general in portraiture we don't want to shoot a hand straight on, but rather from the side. That slims the hand down and generally make is look a bit less awkward.


#3 = Classic Rembrandt lighting taken from the short side. Rembrandt lighting is very dramatic and does not always work well with female models. There is a touch of a catch light in the camera right eye, but the image would be stronger with a lower lighting ratio; opening up that whole camera right side would be worth considering. The light on the forehead is a bit hot for my taste. The hair along the camera left side of her face looks a bit odd.

Again, the hand with a straight on fist looks a bit awkward. I wonder about the crop as well; there is a lot of negative space along the top and left hand side of the image. I suspect a stronger crop there would be worth considering.


#4 - Again Rembrandt lighting with you taking the shot from the short side. The rule about not letting the nose cut across the cheek bone applies here as the eye behind the nose looks a bit strange. The way the shadow cast from her nose falls in this image makes her nose look quite large (it doesn't look like this in the other images). Again the light on the forehead is quite hot.

The camera right ear is just cut off by the frame and that draws the viewer's attention to it. The reflections from the glasses are adding a bit of a distraction. The way that her hair falls over her shoulder gives her a "beard" and that isn't working for me either. If you had thrown her hair behind that shoulder, the image would be stronger.

[escape]

Nice job David. She does have lovely eyes. Would love to see more photos of her.

Manfred, A very interestig and informative analyisis.

[Shadowman]

Nice efforts, prefer 3 and 4 as the piercing is quite distracting, a part of her personality yes, but aesthetically it creates and obstacle for the photographer and viewer.

[Chataignier]

Manfred : Thanks for your detailed analysis - interesting. Re numbering, yes, point taken.
These were my very first studio portraits about 3 yrs ago using lighting belonging to a club. Classic studio strobes with medium sized rectangular softboxes. Perhaps not close enough in...?
I cant disagree with any of your points, except perhaps the fist, which is very much her personality : straight talking, almost aggressive. Cant do much about many of these things in post prod, but regarding crop etc I will make time to revisit them, especially #3 which was my favourite.
Thanks again for taking the time.

[Chataignier]

Shadowman : yes, I hate that piercing too.

[Chataignier]

Lovelife65 : Thanks ! As for over processed portraits, it's my pet hate. Of course we want to show the subject in a pleasing way, but no-one has completely featureless skin, it's just not credible - nor is it attractive in my view.

[Manfred M]

Manfred : Thanks for your detailed analysis - interesting. Re numbering, yes, point taken.
These were my very first studio portraits about 3 yrs ago using lighting belonging to a club. Classic studio strobes with medium sized rectangular softboxes. Perhaps not close enough in...?
I cant disagree with any of your points, except perhaps the fist, which is very much her personality : straight talking, almost aggressive. Cant do much about many of these things in post prod, but regarding crop etc I will make time to revisit them, especially #3 which was my favourite.
Thanks again for taking the time.

Thanks for the information.

The relative size and distance from the subject of the softboxes are a key component of how hard the light appears. With rectangular softboxes, a good rule of thumb is that in order to achieve soft light, the front of the main softbox (key light) should be no more than 2X the diagonal from the subject; closer is better and in my work I often have to retouch a small part of the softbox out of the image.

Secondary factors include the baffles that are being used (most soft boxes employ two) and how the lights are being pointed at the subject. Are they direct or has the photographer "feathered" the light so that the central hot spot of the light does not on the subject.

[Chataignier]

@Manfred : I was aware of the principle regarding distance, but that's a useful rule of thumb - thanks.

[Chataignier]

@Manfred, following your detailed comments on these portraits, I have revisited the #3 and made the following changes :

Cropped tighter on the left and top, given a wee bit more room on the right
Selective increase exposure (global and shadows) on the right of the image to simulate lower lighting ratio L-R
Toned down "hot" forehead
Lightened camera right eye/eye socket
Slight anti-clockwise rotation

Unfortunately this has brought into light a stray hair across the camera right eye, but as this was an exercise, not a final work, I didnt have the patience to clone it out.

I think this is MUCH better - very grateful for your suggestions.
What do you think ? Would appreciate your comments.

[rpcrowe]

I played with this image a little - hoping to emphasize Jade's beautiful eyes... I hope you don't mind.

[Manfred M]

I agree, this is definitely much better, but those stray hairs have to go!

[Chataignier]

To round off the subject, I've tried a b/w, simple conversion plus a bit of contrast tweaking, especially on the bracelet that was a bit distracting. Also removed the stray hair of course.