Holiday Portrait - C&C Appreciated

[D L]

1/100, f/4.5, f = 44mm, ISO 400, Nikon DX crop frame. Image is cropped.

Any constructive C&C appreciated.

I found some nice light (I think) on a recent weekend away and motivated the Mrs into some portraits.
I am actually hard against a wall/window behind me, so I couldn't increase the camera - subject distance (but I could've increased the lens focal length.)

Particularly on composition and post-processing. Also any tips on tweaking the pose. I found it really difficult to assess and adjust the pose as I was shooting.

I like this one for the expression. I don't know where that hand position/gesture came from, but other shots didn't have this more genuine facial expression.

[Geoff F]

She has too much of a startled 'rabbit in the headlights' pose for it to be anything along the lines of a formal portrait - but this makes a great candid fun shot.

Black dress and white background! Wow, you have handled the exposure very well.

Maybe very fractionally tight at the top compared with the right side? But that is going to the limits of excellence and this shot still works well as it is.

[Manfred M]

I've got to agree with Jeff regarding the "deer in the headlights" look. That tends to be what one gets when the person is not really used to posing for pictures. Hopefully there will be more sessions for you and the Mrs will learn to relax when you point the camera at her.

You've chosen a nice and simple background, and that really helps you pull off this shot; interesting and not distracting. The lighting is nice and even and you nailed the exposure nicely, but the focus might be a touch soft. In portraiture, the eye closest to the camera should be sharp and I can't tell for sure, but suspect it is not (but it is certainly good enough, this is a really minor point). I like the way you are shooting from just above eye level, that helps sculpt the face and especially the chin.

I like the way that her shoulder drops towards the camera, that gives you a nice flow. The hand positioning is okay, but reveals an bit of a problem that is related to the focal length you used. You've already mentioned that you couldn't change the camera / subject distance; but when you compare the size of the arm closest to the camera versus the one against the door, there is a noticeable difference in size. This comes from the focal length you used for a head and shoulders shot; ideally you should be shooting at least twice the "normal" focal length (which is around 30-35mm for that size of sensor) or in the 60-70mm focal length to reduce distortion. Just something to keep in mind for the next time.

From a post processing standpoint, I notice a couple of very minor things I would probably clean up. There is a bit of a silver glint at the camera right side of the back of the mouth I would likely get rid of and the two lines on her neck, I might soften a touch.

So really, a very nice portrait with some minor niggly things you might want to think about the next time you have a chance to do a portrait of the Mrs. Nicely done!

[D L]

Geoff and Manfred, thanks for the feedback. One of my main personal take-aways from this shoot was to take my time.

You both commented on the expression. I picked this shot as it was a more natural expression than the others. It sounds like we have a way to go to get a really good pose/expression. I say we, because I don't think my role behind the camera helped very much on this point. I'm a bit rushed. I have an even greater respect for portrait photographers after this shoot.

Geoff, I'll play with the crop a bit more.

Manfred, I was aiming to have that right eye in focus, but again, the rushing might have played a role in that not quite being the case.

Annoyingly, the focal length could've been a bit longer, even given my lack of space. I have cropped a decent chunk of the original file. It probably could've gotten up close to 70mm. Taking my time for an extra 3 seconds prior to this shot would've improved that issue.

I'll have a crack at the silver glint and the lines on her neck.

[D L]

She has too much of a startled 'rabbit in the headlights' pose for it to be anything along the lines of a formal portrait - but this makes a great candid fun shot.

Geoff,
What do you mean by a formal portrait? Just so our wires don't get crossed here, I'm not taking offence, I'm just not 100% sure what you mean by that.

Not that you keen see, but she's actually wearing denim shorts and a top, and it's a beach shack. It isn't exactly a formal setting.

I am thinking that it might be your nice way of saying that this portrait is miles away from being a professional standard portrait? If so, then point well taken. I guess that is ultimately how the portrait should be critiqued, even if I am aware it is not up to that standard. My main goal in photography at this point is to learn to take professional standard portraits. That includes portraits of people who aren't particularly comfortable in front of the camera (no excuses from me).

I have only just started in this quest, so I am not expecting overnight success, or rave reviews from the CiC community.
I am hoping for honest and constructive feedback, and you and Manfred have done that very well.

Thanks again, for your interest and critique. Please let me know if I correctly interpreted your statement.
Cheers,
DL

[D L]

Improvement?
I re-cropped to a different aspect ratio. My first thought was to give a bit more headroom, but then back tracked and came in tighter on the right.
I had to learn how to soften a selection of the image. That was a very useful exercise in itself.
I softened the area of the neck Manfred mentioned, but I also softened the crease on the cheek and just below the eyes. I also tweaked the area below the eyes slightly lighter.
Without any experience, I tried to err on the side of subtlety with the softening. However, I'm not sure it doesn't make the area a little plastic-y???
I cloned out the mouth speck, too.

[Geoff F]

That looks like a better composition to me, David,

You can be 'formal' in old clothes.

More a case of being relaxed and confident, with a carefully arranged pose.

[selig1656]

Nice come back cleanup and yeah the black dress and white background was handled great in the exposure.

[Manfred M]

I softened the area of the neck Manfred mentioned, but I also softened the crease on the cheek and just below the eyes. I also tweaked the area below the eyes slightly lighter.

It really depends on how you accomplish this (i.e. tools used). Avoiding the plastic look is important; you want to soften the lines without losing the texture. I find that the healing brush tool tends to work well in these situations. I'll do it on a separate layer so that I can cut back the intensity as needed.

[D L]

Geoff, thanks and I think I understand the term now
Thanks Raymond for the positive feedback.

It really depends on how you accomplish this (i.e. tools used). Avoiding the plastic look is important; you want to soften the lines without losing the texture. I find that the healing brush tool tends to work well in these situations. I'll do it on a separate layer so that I can cut back the intensity as needed.

Manfred, I'm using Aftershot Pro 2, which I suspected would be annoying for times like these. I googled what the heal brush in Lightroom does. I basically have the same heal tool but it only works with a circle selection. I can clone any shape I want or use a brush. All these work on layers, so I can adjust the opacity of the layer. I'll have a bit more of a play with it. Thanks again for your help.

[William W]

Any constructive C&C appreciated. . .I am actually hard against a wall/window behind me, so I couldn't increase the camera - subject distance (but I could've increased the lens focal length.) . . . Particularly on composition . . . 1/100, f/4.5, f = 44mm, ISO 400, Nikon DX crop frame. Image is cropped.

Does the original have any of the frame remaining at the bottom?

You've clipped her right elbow and her left breast, it is probably better to have them both clean. Probably better to have all of that door lock too.

If there is no more frame at the bottom, then your consideration - 'I could've increased the lens focal length' is flawed.

It would have been better to be thinking about decreasing the lens's Focal Length -OR- frame the shot in Portrait Orientation and not Landscape Orientation.

However your use of the phrase "increasing the Focal Length" might have been an error and you might have really meant "decrease" not "increase", because "increase" doesn't really make sense in conjunction with you stating that you couldn't move back away from the Subject any farther - perhaps you would make this point more clear, please?

*

I concur it was a good call to remove the blue band at camera right, that was distracting.

*

I suggest that the RIGIDITY of the SUBJECT (expressed by terms like “startled” “rabbit in the headlights”) is due the TYPE of RAPPORT which was present during the PORTRAIT SESSION.

I suggest that the Subject brought to the Portrait Session the RAPPORT of the relationship of “Husband and Wife” and not the relationship “Subject and Photographer”.

If this is the case, then one avenue worthwhile pursuing is for you to carry you camera more often and use it, more often - such that it becomes normal practice for others to relate to you as the Photographer who is simply capturing “moments of people’s lives”.

Then, in time, when you do set about controlling the pose of a particular Subject, the TYPE of RAPPORT will become closer to “Subject to Photographer” and not “Wife to Husband” or “Friend to Friend” etc.

*

As an example, if you choose to emulate this style of informal, yet still intimate portraiture around family and friends, I think that will be a good stepping stone for you to more formally control and pose, Family Subjects, later on.

Try this type of non invasive yet still intimate Candid Portraiture, to get you family used to you always making pictures of them . . .


504468v06
EOS 5D; EF85 F/1.8
F/1.8 @ 1/80s @ ISO400 HH Manual Mode

WW

[D L]

Does the original have any of the frame remaining at the bottom?

WW

Yes and no. I held the camera crooked. I straightened the image because I thought the crooked door would look a bit odd. The straightening process lost me all my real estate at the bottom of the image. So I did mean increase the focal length, along with holding the camera level and framing the shot more accurately.

Decreasing the focal length would've given a bit more wiggle room with the final composition and probably would've helped. Previous shoots I've self-critiqued as going too wide and including distracting junk in the frame, so I've consciously been trying to shoot a bit tighter

When I re-edited this image last night, I checked and saw I had some other head and shoulders shots at 50-56mm. I'll have to check again to see if a missed the elbow/breast/lock with those - and held camera level Maybe some of those might make a stronger final composition. I took lots of photos on this day, and probably my selection of the best image is another skill I need to work on.

I think you are right about the husband wife thing. Possibly the worst thing is she's watched me learn from the beginning. In that process I've missed shots (mostly of the kids, but also her and others) by getting the technical camera settings side of things wrong and taken some otherwise crappy pictures. A couple of times, earlier on, she's taken camera out of my hands and twisted the dial to auto . She's just come around to posing for portraits after I've started getting my act together a bit more.

If I had posted an image a bit earlier in my photography progress, I might've gotten some advice like you gave in this thread Lydia and some of those scenes might have been avoided and I'd have progressed a bit faster.

She probably still has reservations about me as the photographer.

I already do the candid shots of the kids a lot. I'll have to include shooting her more, as you suggest.

Thanks Bill, I appreciate your help.

[William W]

Yes and no. I held the camera crooked. . . The straightening process lost me all my real estate . . . I did mean increase the focal length . . .etc

OK. Understood.

*

Decreasing the focal length . . . Previous shoots I've self-critiqued as going too wide and including distracting junk in the frame, so I've consciously been trying to shoot a bit tighter.

Understood. Good. I think that’s a good method of (self) learning technique, after recognizing a short-coming to hammer away at that one aspect. I do that. I reckon it works a treat for me.

I’d just suggest that you balance that relentless hammering by with thinking about when NOT to hammer at it.

Maybe an example will illustrate very simply. Give me two 5D Series Cameras and a fast 35 and a fast 85 and I will be as happy as Kid in the Mars Bar Factory running around almost always framing exactly how I want the final image . . . but if I walk into a small room I want a 24mm lens and I shoot a bit wide for more options in Post Production, almost always.

*

If I had posted an image a bit earlier in my photography progress, I might've gotten some advice like you gave [in thread ‘Lydia’] some of those scenes might have been avoided and I'd have progressed a bit faster.

It occurred to me that you took some good stuff away from that thread. Doesn’t matter it was ‘then’ instead of ‘before then’.

I think what matters is: you know more today, than yesterday.

*

She probably still has reservations about me as the photographer.

I am not being a smart-alex, nor rude in any manner whatsoever to your Wife- but any reservations that she might have are totally irrelevant to your Photography and your progression in The Craft.

What matters is what you allow to affect you.

It is the same as posting stuff here for critique – people are hesitant only because they allow themselves to be affected by their own doubts or what others’ might think, etc.

In the same manner anyone’s’ reservations that they might have about your skill or competence as a Photographer will have nil affect on your work, unless you allow it so to be.

It is you who are in total control of that particular aspect of your Photography. I only wish that we could control sunlight, as easily.

*

I think you are right about the husband wife thing . . . I already do the candid shots of the kids a lot. I'll have to include shooting her more, as you suggest.

Good idea – include other people too, even strangers, that’s also important.

WW