Oh, she's lovely!
Had you any particular criteria or specification set for the homework exercise, or if a matter of you having complete freedom to choose your topic and how you present it; i.e. are you asking us to comment against any particular parameters set for you?
The homework is just for a freeform portrait in natural light - we are still beginners
I took this in the shade against a billboard to get the vertical split
Love the eyes! Pity the mouth is pale, because of the comparison to the hair, but its great.
What's interesting for me is that my planned response has changed as a result of just moving the image so that I did and then didn't, see that vertical split.
First of all I was looking at the whole image, right up to the top, which included the vertical split. When looking at in this view, my reaction was the hair is beautifully exposed but the face is too bright and needs taken back a bit (I would do this by a very soft bit of burning - but there are many ways of approaching the task). But then .....
I scrolled down so that the top of the image was just at the point where the vertical split stops and her hair begins. For me, that changed the whole mood/feel of the picture and I no longer felt that the face was too bright.
Now, as I write, I am still trying to figure out exactly what has happened here in terms of my perception. There is some sort of interplay of tonal interpretation going on here that's telling me that if there is light/mid-tone grey in there at the top right, then that needs to be balanced/complemented by something that's not just dark or bright elsewhere in the image.
Whereas, take out that mid-tone at the top right and then we can (well, I can) more easily accept a higher key approach across the rest of the image.
As I say, this is the best sense I'm making of it at the moment. It was certainly an interesting experience coming to this conclusion, because it's not something I've registered before. But, if my thinking is on the right lines, it's been a very useful learning experience for me. I hope it has for you as well.
I think that subconciously I was following the style of the 70's where there was a trend to go 50/50 vertically, with the person and the background changing midpoint with the persons face just bridging the gap - in otherwards an asymetrical picture in the vertical plane rather than the more standard diagonal. Just can't place where I have seen it.
It seems now to be a more 'modern' style to slightly blow out the skin tones to lose detail when a lady approaches a certain age and the skin has lost the freshness of youth. Perhaps like this ? Which is by Rankin in 2009 - as a novice I am just trying out different styles to see if they work for me.
Last edited by Kentboy; 19th January 2011 at 08:58 PM.
The photo is pretty good for me. There is something about the split almost going through her eye that is just slightly distracting to me though. I wonder if the split was just an inch to the left what the image would like?
I have to say I do like the slightly blown effect.
A 5D and a 135! that is a very very nice combination
Brian, I see you went at f5.6. Did you try shooting with a wide aperture? a 135 used wide looks great. the DoF will get thin but the background will melt if you get some depth behind the subject. I have to admit I like narrow DOF portraits so maybe thats a personal thing...
Having read this, I felt the same thing. Then I went back to the picture & covered the white portion (left part) with my hand & the face didn't look over exposed. I think seeing too much of white altogether does that to eyes. Well this may have been said in a technical language.. So sorry if I am repeating something that has already been said..by Donald :- I scrolled down so that the top of the image was just at the point where the vertical split stops and her hair begins. For me, that changed the whole mood/feel of the picture and I no longer felt that the face was too bright.
Do you know her? Has she seen it? What does she think about it?
I wish I had made that picture.