Presenting Rachel...

Discussion in 'People' started by TeamStarlet, Jun 19, 2007.



  1. Hi All!

    This is my Virgin posting here at NikonCafe. I've been a member for a while so thought it about time I got some idea's from everyone on my work.

    Fantastic community here by the way. I've learnt so much just by reading and absorbing the info provided by everyone. Well done!

    I've been taking photos for about 2 - 3 years now but I'm now starting to really get into it with the possibility of making some sort of career out of it.

    I took these shots few days ago for a good friend of mine who needed them for a modelling/acting portfolio.

    Basically I like these shots and they are some of my best to date, I am however looking for ways to improve so I would really appreciate some good honest advice and critique from you!

    Thanks in advance :smile:


    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

     
  2. Lowolf

    Lowolf

    Jan 26, 2006
    Oregon
    well done
     
  3. Duschoolboy

    Duschoolboy

    731
    Dec 17, 2006
    nice!
     
  4. SP77

    SP77

    Jun 4, 2007
    Rockville, MD
    Love the photos! Beautiful lighting and a beautiful subject. Love the pose too.

    Critique? The only thing I really noticed was that the bokeh in the background was a bit distracting and not quite as neutral as some other lenses. Which lens did you use? Especially on #3 at first glance it was tough to tell where her hair was ending and where the background was starting, which drew my attention away from the subject. Othewise I thought they were truly excellent photos!
     
  5. I cant find anything to pick about. Nice shots, lovely model, exposed well... what's not to like?
     
  6. Seneca

    Seneca

    Dec 4, 2006
    Texas!
    Great pictures...my only comment is her hands missing in some of them. Otherwise fantastic shots.
     
  7. Well "posed". Nice relaxed look to the shots. Only thing I could suggest is maybe a slightly warmer skin tone. Maybe just my monitor but her face looks a tad under saturated.
     
  8. The lens was just a 50mm f1.8. I think this is the plastic lens instead of glass?

    Thanks for the feedback!
     
  9. frede

    frede

    Dec 9, 2006
    Princeton, NJ
    Great 1st post! Your images are very nice, and it's obvious that your subject is comfortable with you. I agree with the others on her hands, and I'm not too crazy about the angle. I would have gotten down to her eye level. She sure has are beautiful eyes.

    Sounds like a match made in heaven - she needs images and you like to shoot. I'm looking forward to seeing more. :smile:

    BTW I love my 50mm 1.8 - it's probably on my camera 80% of the time
     
  10. Those are pretty darned good for a starter post. The only thing that bothers me is the angle you shot from. Personally, I like the camera at eye-level. It gives more of a portrait view as opposed to a snapshot view.
     
  11. Thanks for that... I'll try that angle next time :)
     
  12. Good first post here on the Cafe. Your model is pretty and she looks relaxed. I personally prefer that the models body is canted slightly to the left or right so that the shots are not quite so head on. Her eyes in image #2 are great and I hope you will give us some head shots of her. I may just warm the images up a bit as her face seems a little pale.
     
  13. Thanks for the support :)

    Do you have any suggestions or examples of how to position the models body as you've suggested? I can't quite imagine it in my head without it looking awkward.
     
  14. mercutiojb

    mercutiojb Guest

    I think you mean plastic instead of metal? ;)

    The expression on her face in #3 doesn't really work for me. However, I think #2 is a winner!
     
  15. I am not touting this as a great picture but rather one to demonstrate what I am trying to say. Positioned this way the model does not appear to be looking down the gun barrell so to speak.

    original.
     
  16. eYounger

    eYounger

    36
    Feb 12, 2006
    Great photos, great DOF and Superb lighting may i say, my favourite one of the pics is #2, you really got out the beauty of the model in that one. But there is not really any downside with your photos, but as you said the pictures were to a modelling/acting portefolio, so i would try from different angles, or different positioning on the model or another scene, but that's just my opinion;)
     
  17. I thought that the big difference between the f1.8 and the far more expensive f1.4 50mm was that the lens was plastic instead of glass??? Can anyone confirm this?

    Thanks for the comment!
     
  18. Thanks!!!
     
  19. Thanks for this example Greyflash. I'll try that next time :)
     
  20. tcgoggans

    tcgoggans Guest

    The price difference is all about the difference in the aperature. That one little 0.4 stop variance is what kicks the cost of the 1.4 up so high. It seems crazy, but it is a combination of the actual technical difficulty of the engineering and production of such a fast lens, and the fact that they can offer that lens at a higher price. Market forces.
    But the actual lens elements in both are glass.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Best Christmas present People Jan 8, 2012
My Christmas Present People Dec 20, 2008
Best Christmas Present Ever People Dec 26, 2007
New present came today! Anneliese Rachel People Nov 30, 2007
Presenting Summer Rachel People Oct 11, 2007