# Portraits of my GF, Would like feedback!!



## Gpf06 (May 9, 2012)

Hey guys, here's the JPGs of our recent photo shoot. This is really some of my first ever photo shoot pics, but I'm happy with the way they came out. All natural lighting. Please let me know what you guys think, about both the angles and the composition! 

Thanks a lot

Garrett

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## takoman46 (May 9, 2012)

Nice shots! The 5D Mark III really produces stunning images! I have one question though: Did you intend for the post processed versions to take on a darker and more edgy appearance? I would have liked to see less contrast and brighter complexion on your subject; especially around the eyes. One thing I like to do with portraits is to have the background noticeably darker than the foreground (subject). This helps pull focus to your subject. I can appreciate your composition for all shots except the one with your subject looking towards the right of the frame. I would have framed her towards the left to give more depth to the imagination. I feel that with her on the right of the photo; while looking off the right side to be a moment of distraction rather than a purposefully composed scene. Just my thoughts, hope you found something helpful. Everyone's creative vision is different so I write all this with the utmost respect. Looking forward to seeing more beautiful images!


----------



## vuilang (May 9, 2012)

the first 2 photo (4total) the post hurt my eyes. Does not flatter or pleasing to look at at all.
the composition is also poor, especially the second images: cutting hand, shoulder. that tree bark does not help her but take away her beauty by adding huge distraction (she's beautiful). at the bottom of the photo, is that a foreground blur or a lens dirt smudging around?
I was disappointed that those 4 pic was took by a 5dmarkIII. it's nothing a decent P&S cant be done.
Natural light or not. #1 priority is qualilty. Your photos is dull, contrast is non-existence

last images is much better, well composed, good lighting. the post may not work for me but i guess it's your style.


----------



## westr70 (May 9, 2012)

She's a great looking model!!! ;D


----------



## Axilrod (May 9, 2012)

These look pretty good for a beginner, 5DIII is a hell of a first camera. I think the first portrait is too post-processed, her skin doesn't look very natural, I'd try something a little more subtle. 

The backgrounds in the first 2 images aren't ideal, they are kinda distracting and too similar of a color to skin tones, so the subject doesn't "pop" from the background very well. In the 2nd image there was something weird going on with the camera, that faded yellow area in the bottom left corner is bleeding onto her sweater so it can't be part of the wood.

The third one is the best in terms of composition, and I like it the best out of the three. It has kind of a gritty, sleazy feel, not sure if that was what you were going for. If it were a stock photo, "prostitute" would definitely be one of the tags . But your girlfriend looks like a very pretty, classy chick, so don't take that the wrong way.


----------



## Orion (May 9, 2012)

You are geting the poses and composition ok, but mostly need to work on creating simple images with eyes in focus. . . . and try not to mess with colour too much or you will lose out on the scene itself.


----------



## pdirestajr (May 9, 2012)

Beautiful model!

I'd suggest focusing on one aspect at a time, like composition. Then work on post-processing. I see too many otherwise great images ruined by poor post techniques. Like others have said, the composition of the first two are awkward. Especially the 2nd one- she looks like she has chopped off arms


----------



## smithy (May 9, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> I would have liked to see less contrast and brighter complexion on your subject; especially around the eyes.


+1


----------



## Kernuak (May 9, 2012)

For me the tones are too warm and don't look natural. Trying going back the originals (which are cooler) and do a simple curves adjustment, using a medium contrast curve. You can make some further adjustments afterwards, but I think that will give you a better starting point. Once you have a processing style that works and looks more natural, you can start experimenting with compositions.


----------



## Gpf06 (May 9, 2012)

Wow for all the response. I'll definitely appreciate the advice! As far as my overall look, I wasnt going for a traditional portrait. I wanted the pictures to look warm and a little vintage. 

@vuiling - lol well I hope your eyes feel better! as far as the picture not having contrast, I would definitely disagree. That foreground is a light leak from the sun, not dirt. Why were you dissapointed that they were taken with a mark iii?? 

@axil - Thanks man, I really appreciate it  Ill definitely work towards getting my subject to pop more!

@pdi - Haha yeah I can see what your saying about the arms.

@ker - Thanks, I'll definitely try using more curves in the future

Question - why do you think the first pose looks awkward?? I can see how her arms in the second shot look cut off, but the first I really enjoy. I understand that you guys are saying the post is done too warm, but would you really be able to tell had I not posted the before pics?? 

Once again thanks for all the feedback. keep it coming! In a constructive way....


----------



## RLPhoto (May 9, 2012)

The skintones look underexposed to me kinda giving that slightly cooked look. Your could zoom into 200mm and shoot @ 2.8 to get rid of that distracting background.


----------



## jdramirez (May 9, 2012)

Here's something to try. After adjusting contrast, elminate all color and see if it works well as a b&w photo... if so, you have the right composition and focus... If not... then keep working at it. 

Also, with portraiture, you might want to have her jut out her neck a little to really accentuate the jaw. It's hard for me to explain in type, but you can do a search for it and find some examples.


----------



## xROELOFx (May 9, 2012)

i think you should calibrate your monitor. the colours of the original images look a lot better to me! you can adjust them a bit, but not as much as you've done now.

i don't know what you've done to the first image, but it looks out of focus to me. the original one has lots of nice details, the edited version has less. it's the same with the second image. also, what's the purple colour on the left side of the second edited image?

i like the last image the most. the way she looks and poses and what she wears, fit pretty good. nice job! but, the edited one is again a bit too much. it's a bit too red, the colours do not look right to me.

anyway, hope it's helpfull. good luck and have lots of fun taking pictures


----------



## pdirestajr (May 9, 2012)

Gpf06 said:


> Question - why do you think the first pose looks awkward?? I can see how her arms in the second shot look cut off, but the first I really enjoy. I understand that you guys are saying the post is done too warm, but would you really be able to tell had I not posted the before pics??
> 
> Once again thanks for all the feedback. keep it coming! In a constructive way....



I think because as someone mentioned earlier I believe, you have her on the right side of the frame looking to the right. This photo reads to me: " Don't look at me, look at those 2 knots in the wood behind me, they are more interesting!"... Does that makes sense?


----------



## photoxication (May 9, 2012)

Gpf06 said:


> Wow for all the response. I'll definitely appreciate the advice! As far as my overall look, I wasnt going for a traditional portrait. I wanted the pictures to look warm and a little vintage.
> 
> @vuiling - lol well I hope your eyes feel better! as far as the picture not having contrast, I would definitely disagree. That foreground is a light leak from the sun, not dirt. Why were you dissapointed that they were taken with a mark iii??
> 
> ...



Clearly you have balls of steel to ask for C&C and post your work here. Very nice model! Don't listen to vuiling's comment on the 5D III and disappointing images. Who cares about what camera you use, just get out and shoot something! Disregard vuiling's whole post. I've never had an image online actually "hurt my eyes". That saying is in poor taste, and won't do anything to help you improve your photography techniques. I agree that the skin tones do look underexposed. My favorite composition - the full body portrait in the doorway. Do some more like that, I think your onto something there.


----------



## JerryBruck (May 9, 2012)

As to your editing, I think the untouched originals look much more interesting as well as far more natural. What's wrong with freckles?! The little red dash around her lips is a very pleasing contrast to the cool slate. Red everywhere doesn't necessarily mean warm, or feel warm, it often feels merely like too much, as in too much ketsup. If you are new at this I suppose you may just have to let it work through your system. It could be interesting in the meantime to experiment with i/desaturating/i the colors, right down to the edge of black and white, and come back later for a look to see what if anything this might contribute to certain pictures. I quarrel finally with your smoothing away all detail of your GF's lovely young skin -- any reasons for that should be decades off in the future. Carry on!


----------



## Cptn Rigo (May 9, 2012)

Gpf06 said:


> Hey guys, here's the JPGs of our recent photo shoot. This is really some of my first ever photo shoot pics, but I'm happy with the way they came out. All natural lighting. Please let me know what you guys think, about both the angles and the composition!
> 
> Thanks a lot
> 
> ...



Hi Garret!!

Congrats for your new camera... and lens!!! 5dmkIII + 70-200 2.8 IS II its a killer combo, however let me give you some advices that helped me when I started taking pics

- Some guys already tell you about the post, but that its a personal taste, so its ok if you wanted that look
- the 70-200 its a super sharp lens even wide open, in portraits you dont need to be super sharp (skin blemishes and that stuff really pop out) so shoot close to 2.8, it will help you to isolate your subject (bokeh or background blur) and you could shoot faster to avoid blurry images
- use Spot focus and focus in one of her eyes (the closest to camera)
- Shoot a little far away, all the pics was at 70mm... try shooting at the other end 200... 135... if gives you "background compression" plus it shows a more "pleasing" proportion plus it gives you better bokeh!!!
- Always try to shoot 2 or 3 times the photo, It sucks when a "perfect" shoot its ruined by a quick blink
- Practice, practice, practice 

Good luck and happy shooting


----------



## vlad (May 9, 2012)

Haha welcome to the world of online critique! Hope you have thick skin and realize that ultimately it's all about expressing yourself through images, not following rules or seeking mass approval. It's great to get tips from people, but eventually, you have to follow your own intuition. 

Thankfully, it seems like you do have some, since for a first go, these are pretty good, and I can see that you're experimenting with framing! I agree with most of what's been said about composition, except that the first image, with her looking out of the frame, could still work in general. It's all about intent. Someone said it looked awkward. Awkward is a feeling you can manipulate. You can make things awkward on purpose, although I don't think you intended it in this case. Actually, what makes it seem uncomfortable to me is more the tension in her shoulders. 

I'm also not a huge fan of the processing. I think it is a bit overcooked, I would've gone for a softer look, using curves and selective dodging and burning using a soft, low-opacity brush on a soft light layer. The background is also quite busy in the tree shots.

The great thing is that you have a beautiful and willing model (and the camera's not bad). Good luck!


----------



## K-amps (May 9, 2012)

Cptn Rigo said:


> Hi Garret!!
> 
> Congrats for your new camera... and lens!!! 5dmkIII + 70-200 2.8 IS II its a killer combo, however let me give you some advices that helped me when I started taking pics
> 
> ...



I fully agree with the guy quoted above and I have just 1 more thing to add...

You lucky bastard!


----------



## Cptn Rigo (May 9, 2012)

K-amps said:


> Cptn Rigo said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Garret!!
> ...



Ohh yeah... I forgot that


----------



## Kernuak (May 9, 2012)

vlad said:


> Haha welcome to the world of online critique! Hope you have thick skin and realize that ultimately it's all about expressing yourself through images, not following rules or seeking mass approval. It's great to get tips from people, but eventually, you have to follow your own intuition.


In some ways, that is probably the best advice in the thread. It is very important to develop your own style and if everyone did things the same way, photography wouldn't develop as an art and it would be pretty boring. That said, I think part of the reason the colours look a little odd, is because of the grey door, because you expect grey to be neutral, your eyes are screaming that something isn't right. Certainly, the colours don't look as off on the tree shots, even though I know they have been treated in a similar way. One other comment about colour, for me the idea of vintage and warm don't necessarily go together, rather, I think of low saturation or B&W when I think vintage, so that's something to consider. Compositionally, I think looking out of frame is ok and it is nice to see something different (I have tried something similar and got criticised). However, I think it would work better if you included the whole of her neckline instead of cropping quite so close. For the full length shots, have a go at cropping the left and top, so that the wall is removed and see what you think. Cropping is always a matter of personal taste to some degree, but I think thre are some rules that are worth following or at least considering. I'm not really a portrait photographer, but some rules of composition follow through to a number of types of photography.


----------



## Kernuak (May 9, 2012)

How does this look to you? You may want to look at distortion correction, as the crop accentuates it and make it look like the camera wasn't level (even though the centre column shows it is), but it gives you an idea of how the crop and different processing looks.


----------



## koolman (May 30, 2012)

Hi,

I looked over the pics. Handsome model. However, good people pics is all about lighting, especially face lighting. The pictures are all in ambient light, and somewhat "flat" and lifeless.

It is if someone shot studio pics during a power outage.


----------



## JerryBruck (Jun 15, 2012)

@koolman: Hard not to agree with this, though there can be exceptions, especially in bright overcast exterior conditions when peoples' faces can stand out with a kind of glow, especially when "exposed toward the right" -- no need for additional lighting there.


----------



## n0iZe (Jul 5, 2012)

You wanted feedback: here you go!

Photo 1:
+ framing
+ background
+ model looks natural

- post processing came out horrible, giving it a plastic look
- too few DOF, try using smaller apertures for portraits, since the background is beautiful but distracting

Photo 2:
+ nice background
+ smile looks cute

- yellow thing in the down left corner is awful. Maybe cropping it a little would help, just above the yellow thing
- post processing makes yellow thing look even worse
- post processing takes away natural look
- too few DOF as above

Photo 3:
+ good photo
+ like framing, like pose, like the background

- try to improve your position, so that the horizontal and vertical lines look straight. I think you got the horizontal thing pretty good, but the vertical one not so much. I'm sure a step to the left would've helped solve this.
- don't make her look that dark, especially not the hair. I like the darkness on the clothes (except for the Nike Dunk - these are cool but you almost don't see 'em after processing), but the hair is too much imho.


Please don't take this as an insult, this is intended to be constructive feedback.

n0iZe


----------



## sandymandy (Jul 29, 2012)

JerryBruck said:


> As to your editing, I think the untouched originals look much more interesting as well as far more natural.



+1...ur editing just looks too obvious


----------



## bdeutsch (Jul 29, 2012)

photoxication said:


> Gpf06 said:
> 
> 
> > Wow for all the response. I'll definitely appreciate the advice! As far as my overall look, I wasnt going for a traditional portrait. I wanted the pictures to look warm and a little vintage.
> ...



+1

Although I don't love the post-processing, it's your style so really who is to tell you otherwise (though I certainly wouldn't get rid of your gf's freckles, if only to keep a happy home).


Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos | NY Wedding Photography


----------



## pwp (Jul 29, 2012)

Nice shots, and that's the main thing. As others have said, your PP has done you no favors. 
Your "before" shots look a lot better than the "afters". 

But stay with it and keep posting shots. Available light is great so long as it's nice available light. Use of reflectors can lift a "muddy" location to a completely viable one. Always look closely at the light on the face & particularly the eyes. They're the window to the soul...

PW


----------



## Pierogo (Jul 30, 2012)

The reflections and stairway in the window aren't interesting at all to me. I say crop 'em out altogether and the emphasis be on the beautiful lady, where it belongs.


----------



## pdirestajr (Jul 30, 2012)

ishdakuteb said:


> here is my quick edit on your gf images. i am not sure whether you like it. however, i am still searching for a better way in editing it; therefore, any other comments on my editing will be welcomed.



I'm sorry, not offense but these edits are a little harsh. Why is she glowing in the first image? Completely over processed.


----------



## SandyP (Jul 30, 2012)

Unless it's a special creative shot that has the main focus being some sort of fantastical editing (like a "magic" or "fairy tale" kind of edit/shoot) then the edit should not be the most obvious/glaring thing you notice about the photo. Those three shots are way too over "cooked" in my opinion. You shouldn't have to edit the heck out of very basic shots like that to keep the viewer interested. And if you do, then there's a problem there.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 30, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> ishdakuteb said:
> 
> 
> > here is my quick edit on your gf images. i am not sure whether you like it. however, i am still searching for a better way in editing it; therefore, any other comments on my editing will be welcomed.
> ...



thanks for your comment, like i have said "i am still searching for a way to edit images"  may be i have read/and see too many pictures of brian peterson. it would be nice as if you would show me a way of editing it by posting fix(es) to my editings, in that way i could learn more. thanks in advance...

note: i am learning how to edit image on my own via picking brains; therefore, i need to see lots of comments as well as before and after pictures...


----------



## pdirestajr (Jul 30, 2012)

ishdakuteb said:


> pdirestajr said:
> 
> 
> > ishdakuteb said:
> ...



I would focus on taking great exposures/ compositions in camera and just use "post" for correcting lens distortion, contrast, color balance, sharpness, noise reduction, etc...

Be creative in camera first. Once you are comfortable in that, becoming more creative in your post work can come next.

This is obviously just my opinion. I am not a professional photographer (full-time), but I am a professional artist/ graphic designer. I spend every day sitting at a computer working in Adobe CS programs- maybe that is what I love about photography, it gets me away from the computer! 

Photography and digital image processing are really 2 completely art forms to learn and master.


----------

