NTP: Challenge VIII - Portraiture

[ricktas]

Moving along in our New To Photography Challenge series.

We now come to Portraiture. Portraiture is usually accepted to be photos of people, but remember that you can also do animal portraiture, especially of domestic animals. This challenge is about using what you have learned from the New To Photography Resources, to achieve a portrait shot.

Things to consider

- Aperture (depth of field) to blur your background to isolate your subject.
- Light, using light effectively, maybe back lighting, side lighting, maybe use your flash, consider bouncing the flash off a ceiling, wall etc.
- Your subject's pose, front on, side on, head tilted.
- Are you going to take the photo from the same height as your subject, from above or below?
- Is it going to be a formal portrait, and environmental portrait (taken showing your subject undertaking their work/hobby etc)?
- Are you going to take it indoors with a backdrop etc, or outdoors on the beach, in the park?
- Remember that in portraiture, the subjects eyes are very important, make sure they are sharply in focus.

Please feel free to ask any questions in this thread to help you achieve your results, and we look forward to seeing your final portrait photo.

HAVE FUN!

[Kym]

This will help - http://www.lumitouch.com/benstudiotutorial/index.html
If nothing else read item 10.

[yummymummy]

I took this one yesterday, am going to attempt some more portraits of the kids tomorrow if the weather is still ikky like this. :-S
My son Corey
http://i310.photobucket.com/albums/kk434/yummymummy730/corey-1.jpg

[DAdeGroot]

I took this one yesterday, am going to attempt some more portraits of the kids tomorrow if the weather is still ikky like this. :-S
My son Corey



Mind if I critique a little ?

For portraiture, try to use a longer lens, as wide angle lenses tend to distort and are generally unflattering. In this case, you can see the bottom of the head is wider than the top due to the distortion caused by a wider focal length at close range.

Light control isn't bad here, although possibly a little flat. Some shadow is ok, preferably soft, to add dimension to the portrait. I see there is a degree of directionality to the light (right side brighter than the left), but possibly not enough to really define the shape of the head.

You've also shot from below, causing us to look up his nostrils, this usually isn't a good plan.

Otherwise you've controlled the depth of field nicely and the eyes are sharp. :)

[yummymummy]

Thanks Dave !! :D The light was a little hard to control, we were next to a window where the light was pretty harsh. I'll remember that about the longer lens, the only other lens I have at the moment is the 75-300mm, but will give that a go and see how I go :) Thanks so much!

[Kym]

70-100mm is usual for portrait work.

[yummymummy]

Ok, so if I use the 75-300 that I have at the small end that should be better? I'm also getting a 50mm in a few weeks as well, I've heard they're pretty good too.

[DAdeGroot]

70-100mm is usual for portrait work.

Depends on your sensor size and what look you're after. I tend to shoot head and shoulders at between 135 and 200mm, but that's on a full-frame body.
Just for the hell of it, I've also done the same thing at 400mm, 600mm and 840mm (because I could) ;-)

[DAdeGroot]

Ok, so if I use the 75-300 that I have at the small end that should be better? I'm also getting a 50mm in a few weeks as well, I've heard they're pretty good too.

On an APS-C body, I'd look around the 50 to 135mm focal lengths. A longer lens allows you to blur out the background more while not distorting the face.

For quite a long time, I only shot portraits with the 50/1.8 on a 400D, but found the 100/2.8 macro to be an excellent portrait lens, and since then have moved on to the 70-200/2.8L IS as my primary portrait lens.

[yummymummy]

Ok, thanks Dave :D :th3: I'll keep that in mind :D

[newhart]

speaking of the eyes I need help, when I use flash with all my Blue eyed children and red eye reduction on this is what I get, I have tried PS red tool but that just makes my kids look freaky

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3644/3649564883_cd160a77cc_o.jpg

How can I fix this?

[ricktas]

Bit off topic of the idea of the challenge, but cause it is Dark, your subjects pupils are enlarged to let light in (so they can see). The eye works similar to the aperture in your camera, need more light in using a larger aperture in your camera, need more light in for human vision, the pupil expands.

So how do you counter it, You can use 'pre-flashes' that trigger the pupil to shrink or even a torch or other light source to expose the pupils to light to force them to contract.

Red-Eye removal in PS works, but cause of the enlarged pupils it will look odd. So you need to force your subjects pupils to contract before taking the shot

[DAdeGroot]

Bit off topic of the idea of the challenge, but cause it is Dark, your subjects pupils are enlarged to let light in (so they can see). The eye works similar to the aperture in your camera, need more light in using a larger aperture in your camera, need more light in for human vision, the pupil expands.

So how do you counter it, You can use 'pre-flashes' that trigger the pupil to shrink or even a torch or other light source to expose the pupils to light to force them to contact.


The other way to combat it, is to use off-camera flash, i.e. don't have the flash on the same axis as the camera, so that any red reflection doesn't enter the lenses field of view. You'll also get a much more pleasing result with your lights off the camera axis :)

[newhart]

Thank-you both I will try next time....sorry it off topic second day

[newhart]

This is more natural and what I prefer as flash is not my style
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3643/3649564887_8983ee951d_o.jpg

I have to work on a few things please help
shutter speed: 1/20
aperture: 5.6
ISO: 1600

[ricktas]

Big thing is why ISO 1600? The higher the ISO, the more noise (grain) introduced to your photos. You should leave the ISO on the lowest possible setting (usually ISO 100 or 200),. You only need to increase ISO when it is darkish and you need to get a faster shutter speed. Upping the ISO increases the sensor's sensitivity to light, thus allowing faster shutter speeds.

Nice composition, eye contact and natural smile.

[DAdeGroot]

Big thing is why ISO 1600?

I'd guess because it's at 1/20th, so not much light at all. Of course, at that speed you can see there was slight movement causing the shot to be soft overall.


Nice composition, eye contact and natural smile.

Agreed :)

[Adamm]

My wife is heavily pregnant and i wanted to try some portraits and maternity shots as well as trying to use studi lights for the first time. So far the maternity shots haven't gone as well as hoped but this portrait was pretty good. What do you think?

[newhart]

I'd guess because it's at 1/20th, so not much light at all. Of course, at that speed you can see there was slight movement causing the shot to be soft overall.



Agreed :)

Yes was very late in the afternoon down by the river, I will have to pick my time a bit better so that the shot can be sharper. Thank-you for advice again from both:)

[daw67]

Open to comments.

[DAdeGroot]

My wife is heavily pregnant and i wanted to try some portraits and maternity shots as well as trying to use studio lights for the first time. So far the maternity shots haven't gone as well as hoped but this portrait was pretty good. What do you think?

Not a bad first effort. Couple of points, firstly the eyes are probably not open enough, and as such the pupils appear dark and the eyelids puffy. Possibly tilting her head down slightly, and shooting from a slightly higher angle, wide-eyed and doe-like would provide a better outcome.
Also the light on the right probably needs to be a little higher.

You may consider some post-processing techniques in the final image to reduce some of the lines and smooth the skin (not too much, just to add that extra glow that most women are more than happy to see in a photo of themselves).


Open to comments.

Ok, in this one, you have a few things you could have done differently (assuming a posed portrait rather than a candid).
Firstly, eye contact. The gent is glancing off camera to the left, but there's nothing in the photo to suggest why. In general, go for looking at the camera, unless you're doing a wider angle portrait and it's obvious what the model is looking at.
Shutter speed looks to be too low, as you have motion blur in the shot, leading to a lack of sharpness overall. If you're shooting in aperture priority mode, make sure your ISO is high enough to cater for the chosen aperture such that you maintain the 1/focal length shutter speed guideline.
You also have mixed light sources, daylight on the left, and incandescent on the right. This gives you two different colour casts on model, blueish on the left side of the face, yellowish on the right side. You could fix that in post, but it's not easy. Better to light everything with flashes or remove one of the light sources (close the curtain, or turn off the lights) and work with a reflector to bring back the light on the side you'd now be lacking in light from.
Finally, I'd consider a B&W version of this image. Old men with great facial features quite often benefit from B&W processing to really bring out the character.

[bigdazzler]

thought id throw this one in the mix .. an example of a nice posed yet relaxed natural light portrait. This ones got a bit of everything, a nice clean and simple background with just a little bit of detail in the timber, a leading line from the rail and nice contrasts between the background tones and the natural light on the models face .. I quite like this photo. :)

http://i445.photobucket.com/albums/qq176/DarrenGrayPhotography/DSC010442.jpg

[Krzys]

How is this? I was testing out my cheap autofocus slr (Eos 3000N with 28-80mm f3.5) and came to like this picture...though her chin is chopped off as I over estimated the magnification of the viewfinder.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3390/3624225338_979bfd7d9d.jpg

Sorry if the quality is a bit terrible, I don't have an amazing scanner.

[ricktas]

Good work Darren and Krzys

Darren, your subject is very central, I reckon a crop of the right side would really give it a compositional lift. Good focus on your subject, nice exposure and sharpness is good. His clothing suits the location well .

Krzys, great shot! Shows your subject off well, my only irk, is that I would have liked to see her whole chin in the shot. Nice eye contact but maybe her eyes are in shadow a bit to much and even something as simple as a piece of aluminium foil could have been used as a reflector to add some more light to her face. I like this shot a lot, well done

[Krzys]

even something as simple as a piece of aluminium foil could have been used as a reflector to add some more light to her face. I like this shot a lot, well done This is a good Idea and thanks, however such aids are slightly unavailable when sitting in the park for lunch (I use glad-wrap thank you...)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2477/3624225322_53c6b8e114.jpg

:p

[NikonNellie]

Ok - this is a genre I do need much more practice on. It's hard trying to find a willing subject though. The only PP I did was a slight levels adjustment, noise reduction and a unsharp mask. Oh..... and I clone out his runny nose!

[bigdazzler]

Good work Darren and Krzys

Darren, your subject is very central, I reckon a crop of the right side would really give it a compositional lift.

yea he is a little central Rick , i kinda cropped it like this to leave most of the railing in the shot ..

[Harley]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3636/3524239149_271cbd0f84_o.jpg


I don't do this style very often, but I really went to get into peoples work.


C&C would be fantastic.

[ricktas]

Narelle, looks like he was moving a fair bit. Children shots can be hard cause they are always on the go and often it is a matter of following them around and being prepared for the right moment. It also looks like you shot this looking down from above a little. Try and get to the same height as your subject.

Good effort and he looks like he doesnt mind the camera around him, very natural smile and expression. I reckon with some time, you could get a great shot of this young lad. I like how you have isolated him from all other things around him, making him the one thing in the photo to look at.

[ricktas]

Harley, nice mono conversion and the grain adds to this one I feel. I found my eyes being attracted to the statues/faces in the background a bit to much. I reckon a crop of the right side and the top would really force me to look at your subject without finding my eyes wandering off to look at the extra elements.

Good focus and depth of field

[GGR80]

This was the first day I had my camera a little over a week ago.

[ricktas]

interesting angle GGR80. I am not sure it works as the first thing i did was tilt my head over to view it. Be careful taking photos of your subjects when they are looking down, the effect can make them look non-interested (or non-interesting to the viewer).

I like the use of the fence to create a relatively plain background and it works, however the small amount of sky in the upper left makes us look up into that corner, away from the subject. So be careful and look around the viewfinder frame just before taking your shot and if there are things that distract or draw out attention away from the subject, recompose your shot before taking it.

This photo made me think she was playing a nintendo DS or similar (mobile phone maybe), so it worked on a level of making me think about what she was doing.

Eye contact with the lens is good. If you are not going to have eye contact, try and include what the subject is looking at, and incorporate it as part of the scene.

[NikonNellie]

Thanks Rick - yeah it was hard to capture this little one. He is a bundle of energy, more so when his Aunt and Uncle are visiting. Maybe I should try his twin brother - he's a bit more shy but even more photogenic.
I have just heard of two new pregnancies in the family so I will have a few more subjects to practice on in the near future. I think kids are much more interesting and challenging to photograph.

[GGR80]

Thanks for you comment and will certainly take all that you said into account for next time. We can only get better from all comments made.

Cheers Retta

[Krzys]

I think kids are much more interesting and challenging to photograph.Try taking a portrait shot of a kitten!

[maccaroneski]

Here's one that I took last weekend that i really liked.

I have skipped a few challenges ahead, however had done the basics on my own over the last few weeks so won't bore you with those details

http://i677.photobucket.com/albums/vv131/maccaroneski/CynthiaUpload.jpg

f5.6, 1/125, ISO 125 (was on auto ISO....)

[AndreaB]

I took this last week of a friends little boy. I tried editing gout all the food and dirt on him, but it just distorted the image, so i have left most of it, and it is just part of him.

http://i527.photobucket.com/albums/cc356/aaaburton/Picture003a-1.jpg

[ricktas]

Hi andrea.

Looks like you caught him on the move. There is some motion blur evident in this photo, especially across his t-shirt. However, that is not a bad thing as kids are often always on the go, and the motion blur shows a true representation of that. But, here is a question, do you know what settings to do, to counter motion blur?

I also find the background here a bit distracting and I reckon if you could find a section of the yard with just shrubs or a fairly plain fence etc, and kept your subject a decent distance from that background, you would be on a winner.

I love the dirty face. Kids are supposed to have dirty faces and happy grins, so you have captured a great and natural moment here.

[AndreaB]

Thanks, Ummm to avoid the blur I would need to up the speed of my shutter I assume? It was a snapshot more then a posed picture, I was actually taking a pic of hom walking by, and he turned and smiled at me which was much better. Thanks for the input.

[ricktas]

Yep Andrea, you would need to increase the shutter speed, but just doing that alone will mean less light hitting the sensor and your photo would be quite dark, so you would need also to either use a larger aperture (smaller f number) or increase the ISO, to ensure a correct exposure.

[nature]

Here's a random of one of my boys!

[ricktas]

Nice depth of field there nature and well focused on your young fella. There is just way to much background stuff. It makes as look away from your son and see what is in the room. Always consider what else is visible in the viewfinder as well as your subject and try to get rid of all the distracting elements.

[nature]

Thanks Rick,

Is there any way to make the background blurrier if you're already at the lowest aperture? This one was f/4.5. I do need to start planning some photos I think instead of just snapping away.

Cheers.

[ricktas]

In camera, the further your subject is from the background objects the blurrier they will be. So for example if you took photos of your son outside in front of some shrubbery using f4.5 again, If he was 1 metre away from the bush, it would probably not be very blurry at all, but if he was 5 metres from it, it would be a lot more blurred.

You can increase the blurriness in post processing in your editing software but this has to be done well or it will look 'edited'.

[nature]

Most of my practicing with the camera has been either indoors in our small house or outside in our small backyard, so I'm having the same trouble with most of my photos being too in focus and not getting that blurry effect. I'm still learning heaps and at the moment all are for our own photo albums anyway.

Thanks for your help.

[bigdazzler]

Thanks Rick,

Is there any way to make the background blurrier if you're already at the lowest aperture? .

Longer focal length will help you achieve this too Andrea ... as long you as you have the room to use it.

[MYQ73]

Here's an attempt with my youngest daughter ... was also looking for an excuse to try out my new flash :)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4024/4385610511_337869b682.jpg

[ricktas]

She smiles with her eyes and you have captured that well. There appears to be a distinct colour cast on this photo giving it a slight yellowing, which is evident in her hair and under her chin on the right. Did you shoot Raw or JPG? If Raw a white balance adjustment on the Raw file could really help here. I also think the crop is a little tight and would have liked to see more of her hair etc

[marcusb]

Heres my first try!

Not the most willing participant but my brother will have to do for now.

1.4 @ 1/30 with iso200.

Is white balance setting important when using black & white? Or should I just use auto?

[MYQ73]

Thanks for your comments


She smiles with her eyes and you have captured that well. There appears to be a distinct colour cast on this photo giving it a slight yellowing, which is evident in her hair and under her chin on the right. Did you shoot Raw or JPG? If Raw a white balance adjustment on the Raw file could really help here.

Yes it was shot in Raw with AWB, I'll try white balance adjustment.


I also think the crop is a little tight and would have liked to see more of her hair etc

The reason for the tight crop here was that I was trying to imitate a 'pro' shot of my eldest daughter when she was this age so that 1) I could compare my shot and 2) I could prove to everyone I have identical twin daughters that were born two years apart :)

[savme]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4054/4418418138_e6a2bc7d6a.jpg

no PP done except a crop in camera raw
Camera: Nikon D40
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/4.0
Focal Length: 18 mm
ISO Speed: 400

[Craggles]

Mt first attempt at portraits taken using the new 50D and the 50mm f/1.8 in Fremantle, Perth, of my youngest sister. We were just mucking around, I wasnt trying for anything, all I did was crop it slightly.

Any CC warmly welcomed as I am very new to this, got 4.5 months to get ready for the new bubs / my reason for buying the 50D :)

f/1.8 (prob where i've gone wrong here I think)
1/2000 shutter
ISO 100 (think I should have gone the next step down)

looking at it from a more critical perspective I guess the colour of the dress has blown out, because of the apeture I'm guessing?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2698/4419852052_5d4afb567c_b.jpg

[Craggles]

Arg photo stuffed up for some reason, repost

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2698/4419852052_7110c275f8.jpg

I noticed today at work this picture looks fairly washed out on my work screen, any tips on cheaply calibrating your monitor?

[Andrew.S]

Here is one of my boy, we were playing with light painting and then we moved onto remote flashes and snoots. Over sharpened I know but I like the eyes, look into my eyes not around the eyes : -)
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_POZYdUBFZZI/S5jMecMCy-I/AAAAAAAABCw/3vUYLQAtrhk/s720/_MG_4966.jpg

[CherylB]

Heres my first try!

Not the most willing participant but my brother will have to do for now.

1.4 @ 1/30 with iso200.

Is white balance setting important when using black & white? Or should I just use auto?

Marcus - good attempt for your first try! What you have here is a little on the soft side - as evidenced by the slow shutter speed - 1/30 is a bit too slow for what I presume is hand held? Generally, for beginners, anything less than 1/60 is going to result in a bit of blur or "softness".

Depending on the situation, you can either try for a different position (with more natural light) or up the ISO. If you have a tripod, even better, but it then becomes an issue with the model "staying still"!

Did you shoot in b&w or convert in post processing (pp)? With digital, it's usually much better to shoot in colour and then convert in pp as you still have the original if you choose to print in colour. Auto depends on a number of factors - in particular the camera itself and the conditions. Most cameras these days do a reasonable job on auto wb, but it comes down to the camera and conditions, and you really have to play around with your camera in different conditions to know which is best for you.

If possible, shoot in raw. This gives you the benefit of easy wb adjustments (as well as many others) if you get it wrong on the day, whereas with jpeg, you really have to get it right when shooting.

[CherylB]

no PP done except a crop in camera raw
Camera: Nikon D40
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/4.0
Focal Length: 18 mm
ISO Speed: 400

This is a great shot! This kid has a future as an enthusiastic presenter of facts, facts, facts! It's all there in the pose.

You have done a great job capturing this moment. What I would like to see though is a little bit more separation between the subject and the background. However, given the already relatively wide aperture, this might be something you need to do in pp - to blur the distracting background from the engaging subject. Obviously, it's not something you can do "in the moment", but maybe something to think about in future shots.

Just one very minor thing about the crop - try to keep both hands fully in the shot. You've chopped off his left little pinkie, so just be mindful of things like this in future crops.

[CherylB]

Mt first attempt at portraits taken using the new 50D and the 50mm f/1.8 in Fremantle, Perth, of my youngest sister. We were just mucking around, I wasnt trying for anything, all I did was crop it slightly.

Any CC warmly welcomed as I am very new to this, got 4.5 months to get ready for the new bubs / my reason for buying the 50D :)

f/1.8 (prob where i've gone wrong here I think)
1/2000 shutter
ISO 100 (think I should have gone the next step down)

looking at it from a more critical perspective I guess the colour of the dress has blown out, because of the apeture I'm guessing?





Arg photo stuffed up for some reason, repost

I noticed today at work this picture looks fairly washed out on my work screen, any tips on cheaply calibrating your monitor?

Craggles, what you have here is a pretty good shot. You have a good separation of subject and background - a good indication of the right aperture! Where I think you may have been let down is it looks like it may have been taken around the middle of the day? I'm guessing this as there's no exif data available with the photo, but going on the shadows it looks like the sun is up on top! That and the fast shutter speed. Earlier morning and later afternoon are the better times for taking shots without the harsh light of the midday sun. The fact your sister is squinting a bit also detracts a little bit from the overall shot.

With regard to the colour - yes, it is a little bit washed out, but that's a consequence of the time of day it was shot. You'll get much warmer tones earlier or later in the day.

I don't know that there is a really "cheap" option to calibration! If you can, find someone who has a screen calibrator that you can borrow to set your monitor up correctly. Once it's set up, even though they annoy you with "it's time to recalibrate ... blah, blah, blah", most of the time, it's still well within the confines of calibrated colour. Longer term, it's well worth investing in a screen calibration unit - once you've calibrated, you'll never go back! I know from my own experience - I honestly thought my screen colours looked good - until I calibrated it!!!

[CherylB]

Here is one of my boy, we were playing with light painting and then we moved onto remote flashes and snoots. Over sharpened I know but I like the eyes, look into my eyes not around the eyes : -)


Andrew, I like what you have done with this. The light on your boy's face and on the background really makes him stand out. The only criticism I would have in this, is that because his body is totally black, it makes his face seem a little disembodied - if that makes sense? Just a hint of light on his body may help to alleviate that I think.

With the light on his face, I know you've said look at the eyes, not around them, but I can't help looking around them I'm afraid! The shadows under his eyes help to give an overall impression of a young child with a demeanour of a much older person, and I find that a little bit sad in someone so young. If you can, provide a light source from above so that the shadows aren't so obvious. If not, a little pp might be the way to go with something like this.

[cyrusmekon]

http://i40.tinypic.com/2rcvl7o.jpg

[ricktas]

Hey Cyrus,

Very good photo but based on your Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/cyrusmekon/page4/) account, which you opened in 2007, you are way past the New To Photography stage, which this thread is designed for

[cyrusmekon]

:lol2: Doh.

Apologies. Admittedly i just read portrait and thought id post a pic of my recent trip to India.

[krissi835]

Hi, this is a portrait of my daughter taken indoors next to a sliding door. I have trouble with focusing all the time. My Photographs all seem to be out of focus.

[grw46]

You needed to use a lower f number to give a higher shutter speed
F5.6 @ 1/20th of a sec is too slow for hand held.
A lower f stop will give a faster shutter speed and give you a much better chance of a clear in focus photo in a low light situation like this. Cheers Garry

[Craggles]

I dont get it?

[ricktas]

I dont get it?

Sorry Craggles. I removed the post you were referring to. Spammer! who said he was in USA, but IP resolved to Vietnam, and he had commercial links in his signature. So his post (which was his very first post) was removed and he was banned and reported to our international anti spamming network. which renders his IP and email address useless on thousands of sites worldwide.

[Craggles]

ohhh lol

thought he was just having a dig at me lol

[Dwarak]

Hi, this is a portrait of my daughter taken indoors next to a sliding door. I have trouble with focusing all the time. My Photographs all seem to be out of focus.

I am new to photography as well I had big problems with focusing as well but it also depends on what mode are you taking pictures in and is it moving or stationary that makes a big difference. You may want to check the auto focus points is it on the subject you want to focus on what kind of gear you are using....

[krissi835]

Thanks for the input. I think I should use my tripod more for starters. I have recently acquired a remote for my camera (Nikon D3000) so I will be putting it to use as well. I guess its all practise practise practise and helpful comments from others with more experience. Thanks heaps.
Krissi:)

[ricktas]

Thanks for the input. I think I should use my tripod more for starters. I have recently acquired a remote for my camera (Nikon D3000) so I will be putting it to use as well. I guess its all practise practise practise and helpful comments from others with more experience. Thanks heaps.
Krissi:)

If you are taking indoor photos often and the shutter speed is to low,. use a smaller f-stop number or you can increase your ISO as well. Have a read of the New To Photography guides on ISO, Shutter Speed and Aperture to get an understanding of how they interact, and how YOU can control them to get better photos.

[eemiassim]

I am slowely getting better at my portrait work. Thought I would add this one in to see what else I can do to improve.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4010/4419790496_6746e000a7_b.jpg



Other then controlling the light a bit better to add some depth what more should I try?

ETA - When I was looking closely I noticed how grainy it was. I need to look at all my settings more before I shoot. I had it on ISO 800 from indoor shooting and forgot to put it back down to ISO 100 when I went outside.

[krissi835]

What beautiful big blue eyes. I don't know about anyone else, but I like grainy portraits.

[SanGabriel]

First animal portraiture of this thread! :food04:

Dog of my boss, taken in the office.

http://www.ps3udo.info/img/charlie_1.jpg

[Loum]

Hi,
I took this in Bali recently. Interested in all honest feedback. I am an absolute beginner (still....)

Louise
http://i801.photobucket.com/albums/yy296/Loum_album/Bali_smportrait.jpg

[Craggles]

An interesting picture, nice work.

Just a quick note though, where you've cropped her shirt out to make the rest black and white there are some small sections, i.e. left arm, where you can see that you've gone to far onto her shirt or left some of her skin.

Maybe make it a bit more contrasty? Darken her wrinkles a little.

[Loum]

thanks,
yes its my first selective colour attempt and I learned a lot. I 'll play with the contrast.
cheers

[Loum]

Hi,
i feel fairly unqualified to give feedback on portraits, but in the spirit of encouraging CC for us all, I will add a few thoughts on last couple of posts that have little or no feedback.

Eemiassim,
This baby has a lovely face and the eyes have beautiful clarity - looks like she is looking straight into the lens. I like this. I wonder if the cropping could be worked on to make the composition in the frame more symetrical or balanced a little more. Can't comment on the grainy aspect - for me it kind of works to have babies looking just a little soft rather than overly crisp. They are so soft!

San Gabriel,
nice looking smiling dog. I think maybe the nose is more in focus than the eyes.... might be better to focus on the eyes. nicely composed, shame about the piles of things in the background- they distract a bit - looks like a very compliant dog for a portrait.

cheers.

[krissi835]

Hi, ...again..:-) I've been working on my portraits. I took this of my daughter outdoors in the evening. I used a higher ISO (800) and used on camera flash. I think I got better results this time however could someone please suggest a way to stop the glare of the sky in the background? Thanks

[mcmahong]

Here are 3 shots (hope it is ok to post a few at once) from a trial photoshoot I did the other week. I'm still learning, but becoming more and more happy with the results.

Any feedback at all please? I really want to push my skills to a level that I can get the odd paid job.

All photos taken on a nifty fifty with a Canon 50D. Mostly I used natural window light, but sometimes bounced a weak flash (I just can't remember if I did it in these or not).

[Craggles]

Last one is my fav for sure.

You should think more about flash's / reflectors if you wanna get into paid work, your results will become alot better I'd say.

Great shots though :)

[mcmahong]

Thanks for the nice comment. Just wondering how you think these photos would be improved, or what their flaws are (the obvious one is the cropping, but I was literally backed up against the far wall with a prime lens). I'm open to all constructive criticisms.

[Chris G]

@MC: First image kinda work's for me, though it dosnt at the same time.. The perspective of the photo give's me the illusion that you have your subject tilted on a very steap angle, thus in saying that look's very unconfortable for the subject lol, even though he look's quite content.. lol ;)

In my opinion, shooting a subject with them being at such a low angle (head resting on the floor). You may wan't to try and really get down to there head level, looking them almost head on or around 45degree's so to say. And last thing, choping off the elbow's (body part's), sometime's not a good thing with a full or half body shot's :).. Like many other's will say here, alway's try and experitment with differnt angle's and level's and of course keep practicing :th3:

Apart from that, lighting (white balance ect) spot as far as I can tell (no expert though), the photo is nice and sharp with a good DOF.

Photo 2: I really like this one, the B&W treatment has been done well, look's studio to me. Well to be honest, I thought they all where done in studio when I first saw the image's :D. Anyway, the 3rd is my fav / pick, there's abit of everything there. From emotion being the mother and the child, the B&W treatment that enhance's it and just the generule layout all in all.

Topstuff matey.. :th3:

Chris

[Chris G]

Here's one I took of a friend of mine, to me everything look's fine apart from maybe asking her not ware a somewhat of a tank top / singelt lol.. I believe this due to when taking a should to head portrait, you don't other bit's of the skin showing as it can distract the viewer from the main feature your trying to present / photograph. Of course by all mean's, correct me if I'm wrong.. ;) lol

EDIT: quick note. photo was taking only couple of week's back during a very late afternoon at around 6ish.. Just as the sun was getting ready to set.

F/N: 5.6
Shutter: 1/350
Focal: 105mm
ISO: 800

What do the good people at AP think?

[FallingHorse]

Okay - portraiture (and everything else in photography) is new to me but I've given it a go.
f 4.5
1/80 @ 95mm
ISO 800
Removed distracting object from r/h side in PS

[BeeB84]

Hello :)

This is my first post with a photo, I took this one a few months ago (3 days after I got my DSLR) of my dog, Maggie.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2756/4514248094_1ef35e5ff3.jpg

[mcmahong]

Falling Horse... I'm definitely no expert but am learning more and more about portraiture each day. The subject is great for portraiture - rugged and with a somewhat menacing expression. What kind of lighting did you use, or is this natural light? His face and body are entirely lit up, so I think the mood of the image could be enhanced if there was more shadow cast across the face and a darker background. Also, his tattoos are part of his personality... it may be good to see more of them perhaps? Otherwise it's a good shot (could perhaps be a touch sharper?), and you've captured expression well. Good one.

[mcmahong]

BeeB84. Cute puppy! It's a gorgeous photo. Is it cropped down at all. 'm just wondering if the pup's head is maybe a little too cut off with the ears out of frame? Nice and sharp with good DOF though. :-)

[FallingHorse]

Falling Horse... I'm definitely no expert but am learning more and more about portraiture each day. The subject is great for portraiture - rugged and with a somewhat menacing expression. What kind of lighting did you use, or is this natural light? His face and body are entirely lit up, so I think the mood of the image could be enhanced if there was more shadow cast across the face and a darker background. Also, his tattoos are part of his personality... it may be good to see more of them perhaps? Otherwise it's a good shot (could perhaps be a touch sharper?), and you've captured expression well. Good one.

Hi McMahong - it was taken as the sun was setting in natural light under our side veranda which has an opaque roof. My subject doesn't like his photo being taken and thought I was capturing the dog on the chair next to him (though I think he is secretly pleased with the outcome lol). Funny you should mention the tattoos as that is what someone else said as well - it probably could be sharper - I think you're right. Was taken more as a grab shot rather than a formal portrait. Thanks kindly for your feedback.

[BeeB84]

BeeB84. Cute puppy! It's a gorgeous photo. Is it cropped down at all. 'm just wondering if the pup's head is maybe a little too cut off with the ears out of frame? Nice and sharp with good DOF though. :-)

Thanks for the feedback, unfortunately it hasnt been edited at all so I cant include more of the image. I will take that on board and try not to cut off any more body parts :)

[SnowA]

Continuing on the animals theme... taken on an old P&S which I no longer have. I suspect a weak fill flash may have helped?

http://warmtinny.com/gallery2/d/50835-2/D_03_09_06.jpg

I'll also throw this one in for a bit of comic relief. Nothing much redeeming about the photo, but I only had a very basic camera phone with me.

I suppose it shows why having a camera, almost any camera, handy is worthwhile :D

http://warmtinny.com/gallery2/d/50823-2/Cat_balance.jpg

[FallingHorse]

Hello Snow - not sure if it's just me but I can't view your images in the thread

[SnowA]

Sorry about that - is it any better now?

[FallingHorse]

The first picture has shown up but the second is gone completely.

[I @ M]

I think I got better results this time however could someone please suggest a way to stop the glare of the sky in the background? Thanks

Under those conditions I think that you would be better off using the lowest ISO possible and then setting the exposure compensation to around -1.7 to -2. That would give you around 1/60 @ your chosen aperture of F/11 and "should" control your background light a bit better. To counteract your deliberate underexposure you should then raise the flash exposure compensation by +1 but it may take a few tries to get the ratio correct.

Go and experiment on a child sized object in similar conditions and try a variety of settings to obtain a reasonably well exposed background and subject. Be warned however that foreground "distractions" like the grass in that shot may influence the flash metering system by reflecting light back to the camera earlier than is desirable and confuse the flash and camera metering.

[I @ M]

Chris G, the light in that shot is great and warms people up perfectly. There is a good reason that so many outdoor portraits are taken under similar conditions, you have found that good reason.
The actual composition with regard to "skin showing" is (to me) not a great drama to me as there is enough to show that the lady actually has arms and shoulders and at the same time doesn't overpower her face as the main focal point of the picture.
Unfortunately there is an overall softness to the shot that I feel is due to the compression in resizing this to 52 kb, I am sure that it would look better at around 250 kb and certainly fine at full resolution.
Another thing I would have suggested is to halve your ISO value to 400 and it would still have given you a shutter speed of 1/125 and at 105mm that should still have been entirely adequate.

All up I reckon it is a very good start at portraits, your composition works and you have got a good handle on focussing to get the subject clearly defined. :th3:

[I @ M]

FallingHorse, there is a fairly golden rule about keeping your shutter speed equivalent to or greater than the focal length of the lens you are using when hand holding to avoid "motion blur" and it appears that you have broken that one straight up with this shot. Other than that a bit more careful metering to avoid the hot spots on his left forehead and cheek area would have given a cleaner image as well as introducing a little darkness to his left side which as a bit of contrast may have suited this shot.

Go out and get the same fella to pose more for you, buy him beer if necessary as it is entirely justified for your learning curve in portraiture. :D

[SnowA]

The first picture has shown up but the second is gone completely.

I really don't know why that's happening. I'll try uploading it here instead of linking to it.

[FallingHorse]

FallingHorse, there is a fairly golden rule about keeping your shutter speed equivalent to or greater than the focal length of the lens you are using when hand holding to avoid "motion blur" and it appears that you have broken that one straight up with this shot. Other than that a bit more careful metering to avoid the hot spots on his left forehead and cheek area would have given a cleaner image as well as introducing a little darkness to his left side which as a bit of contrast may have suited this shot.

Go out and get the same fella to pose more for you, buy him beer if necessary as it is entirely justified for your learning curve in portraiture. :D

Thanks for the helpful feed-back:) You are right - the shutter speed was 1/80 and focal length 95mm - although I must have missed the motion blur :( I was using Evaluative metering mode, should I have used Partial or Centreweighted.

I wont tell him you said to bribe him with beer - he might expect beer all the time. Although seeing that he is a rather uncooperative subject, perhaps I could feed him beer first and then photoshop the bleary eyes..... but seriously, thanks for the input - I shall have to learn a bit more about metering.