light work
Edited lingerie shoot
Posted by drphoto (Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom) on 5 February 2008 in People & Portrait and Portfolio.
As the title suggests, this is the picture from yesterday after having been processed using Sigma Photo Pro 3.0 and Photoshop CS2
I welcome all constructive comments, compliments and criticisms.
I am here to learn. The fastest way for me to learn is for you to be really unforgiving and articulate in your criticism =D)
If you don't have time to comment don't forget to give a star rating as you pass through!
Dan
P.S. You can find my fashion and portrait work here: http://www.modelmayhem.com/drphotographer
My full website is now live, please check it out: http://www.dr-photographer.co.uk
Hans from Heiligeneich, Austria
nice, sexy portrait of an atractive woman...well done!
5 Feb 2008 7:40am
Jeff from Honolulu, United States
I think you've done very well with your processing.
5 Feb 2008 7:49am
@Jeff: Thanks very much Jeff, sometimes I think I'm overdoing the saturation and contrast!
Dan
Daigneault - Photographe from Granby, Québec, Canada
Nice picture
Nice processing
Very nice model
Welcome in am3 Dan!
gilles
5 Feb 2008 8:57am
CraHan from Koolkerke, Belgium
I don't think you overdid the saturation here or the contrast at all. It fits the photo well actually. Well done on this shot, the composition and lighting are great (and so is the model obviously :P)
5 Feb 2008 9:35am
@CraHan: Thank you for assuaging my doubts (although I never doubted the model lol!)
Steven from Montreal, Canada
I like how you composed, exposed, and processed this shot!
5 Feb 2008 9:58am
Laurent from Lyon, France
very impressive shot. You just turn with very little changes a very good shot to a perfect one.
appart the fact that the model is very beautiful and sexy. I like the way she pose and most of it the light.
Very well done
5 Feb 2008 12:02pm
@Laurent: Thank you very much Laurent - I rate my editing skills above my photographic skills at the moment lol!
Dan
Man With 101 Names from Hamburg, United States
this second shot is very nice , very nice pp work compared to the one yesterday and I like that you cropped her in better this time she seemed too far away in yesterday's shot , very nice
5 Feb 2008 1:14pm
@Man With 101 Names: Hello Mr 101, the shot ysterday was just a jpeg converted directly from the RAW file, there was no PP work done. I tend to shoot with the editingsuite in mind because I can relax and do my thing there without worrying about the model getting bored!
Babul Bhatt from Bombay, India
Wonderful post-processing. Love the back-lit as well as maintained the contrasts. Great model-shoot.
5 Feb 2008 1:22pm
Lorraine from Gatineau, Canada
Well, isn't that well done! My only complaint is that I don't look like that lol
5 Feb 2008 1:43pm
@Lorraine: Hey, somedays I wished I looked like that! lol
Calusarus from St Sorlin en Valloire, France
A really uneasy shot : a backlight, but with a beautiful work on light.
5 Feb 2008 5:36pm
@Calusarus: Thankyou kindly, the truth is the trick is in the editing!
Dan
Tawny from Cerritos, United States
Honestly, I’ve seen better. This is a below average shot, no post processing technique can ever rescue a poorly executed and bland composition. I understand you’re not passing yourself off as a great photographer (perhaps someday you will be) you’re still learning, but if you want to stand out from the rest, please come up with something original. We are all guilty of repeating or copying compositions that we’ve seen on magazines and books thinking that replicating these shots could improve our skills. They do not, our efforts merely become shadows of other photographers work, we become followers instead of innovators. But if you all are just interested in making “pretty” pictures (as I’ve seen in this community, out of millions of members, I’ve only seen two or three photo galleries with works that are original and innovative, and they don’t get a lot of attention) by all means knock yourself off, it’s nice to get good comments.
5 Feb 2008 9:27pm
@Tawny: Hi Tawny, thanks for your comment.
You got me dead bang. This shot was heavily influenced by a La Perla shot, which the model sent me to let me know what sort of shots she wanted. In my defence, this is my photoblog and not my official (still under construction website) so my best stuff doesn't go on here. Furthermore, this is just a shoot for a friend who wanted to update her portfolio for applying to agencies. She picked the shots she wanted to work around and the agencies need to know she can do the standard poses as well as the 'break the mould' poses.
You're right then, this is nothing more than a pretty picture, nay, the mimic of a pretty picture but that was my intention. I'm not trying to break the mould. I'm not sure it <i<can<i> be broken within the context of a lingerie shoot but you could have at least named the 'few' members of this community who are out there setting the standards rather than just flaming me.
I prefer bad comments to good ones, someone poiting out a flaw is an opportunity to learn. Unfortunately, all you have done is complain - that desn't fall under the umbrella of 'constructive' commenting but thanks for your input - it was exciting reading my first hate mail!
btw, I am a landscape photographer by choice so I'm used to working with what I've got rather than creating something magical and new. I envy those who have that talent and would love to see some of your work...
Lilly from United States
I think this is quite good, and the lighting is even better. But I need need need need the tip of her shoe in the shot. :)
Also, maybe a tilted shot would be cool, too!
8 Feb 2008 12:01pm
@Lilly: Ah, yes, the shoe. In fact it was in the shot but I forgot, when I did my cropping, that I would be adding a border. I can probably move the image layer around to get everything in.
I like doing tilted (or as I call them, 'jaunty') shots but I haven't got any in this shoot I'm afraid.
Twelvebit from Victoria, United States
I should be so misfortunate as to take pretty pictures of beautiful women. While Tawny no doubt makes some legitimate criticism, the simple fact is what you shoot, and how, depends largely on your intended audience. Pretty pictures are what most people want to see, including people who are interested in photography. Even Tawny notes that original work (whatever that may be) doesn't get much attention. Portfolio images are expected to look a certain way. I doubt your models, or those to whom they are showing their portfolios, are going to appreciate originality that deviates too far from the accepted norms.
In my experience, the images that I think are "original," and that I like the best myself (especially my own images), are not what most other people appreciate --including at sites where the audience might be expected to be more avant garde. In fact, in my experience, "originality" is usually little more than a different or non-standard convention. If you shoot outside the prevailing convention of your audience your work won't be considered "original," it will merely be rejected. Truly original work is ahead of its time and only appreciated long after the fact.
16 Mar 2008 4:09pm
@Twelvebit: I couldn't agree more. The images I love the most in my collection, the ones I deem most original and 'mine' are not the ones that my friends and colleagues comment upon!
In this case, the purpose of the shot is to show the model can do a conventional shoot. I leave it to those at the height of the genre to break the mold.
Sigma SD10
1/10 second
F/5.6
ISO 200
34 mm (35mm equiv.)