Who's up for a game...?
|AnimeGalleries [dot] Net||AnimeWallpapers [dot] Com||AnimeLyrics [dot] Com||AnimePedia [dot] Com||AnimeGlobe [dot] Com|
Who's up for a game...?
I'm sorry bro, but I am not a fan of this set. Something about the light makes the images, for me, not that impressive and take out a lot of the colors in some of the images. I am not sure what this type of photography is called. Maybe stock photography where you tell a story through the image, but I would suggest better lighting because it is killing the images. I am sorry to be ruff, but us Photographers need to know what we can do better on.
check this guy out:
i dont really like it but the way you put the cards is great.
you can't call me weird, cause im unique ^_^
btw if youre going to admire me, please tell me who you are, gracias
siggy by teddy thankies ^^
**UPDATE** NEW DRAWINGS
* * * A R T ~ W O R K * * *
My sweet sweet family is located in my blog
if you want to be a part of our family, pm me
I think the lighting was ok in the second and last picture. Although I'm not a really good expert on photography, I think it could use a little work. Maybe on the positions of each person to either show more parts of the body better
I'm a commercial photographer, so yeah I guess you could say like stock photography. For instance, when I look at the link that you gave me, I find all those images a total eye-sore. They're cluttered, with bad perspectives, and many are washed out with no controlled lighting at all. I know you meant well by showing me that person's work, but I would never want to shoot like him. In fact, my clients would be abhorred if I shot like that, as it has no commercial value outside of the music and arts industry.
Now, I'm not saying that kind of work is bad, it's just not "polished" and professional. But I'm glad you showed it to me because it gives me some perspective on why we're clashing on ideas here. I'll tell you frankly that what most people think is "cool" on an indie album cover, to most professional photographers looks amateurish, messy, and low-budget. That's the overall impression I get from the work in that link, though I've been around long enough to see and appreciate the art involved. I guess that's why we're not seeing eye to eye, but be aware that you'll never convert me to that kind of shooting, lol. Again not knocking the style... for album-type work it's great, but it's not my industry nor anything I would want to aspire to.
So let's just agree to disagree. It's obvious that we'll never like the same type of photography, and will always want images to look different from each other. You're just too artsy for me, man! lol.
P.S. - keep in mind that I'm a 32 year old man who has made a living in advertising and commercial imagery for a very long time. I think my style and tastes are out of place with your generation... but dammit, I love anime and that's why I stick around! I will however refrain from showing anymore of my photography here.
Last edited by Neddog; 09-15-2009 at 10:42 PM.
Ok i understand that Neddog, but keep in mind that your posting your pics on this forum where they are open for criticism, tips, and thoughts. The one photo i see potential for is your third photo. As for the rest, there is something about the focal length, lighting, and the subjects that do not appeal to me. I know you are a commercial photographer and that people do like you work, but you have to accept what the other side of critics say. I know I have been doing photography for four years now and i may seem "unworthy" but i know enough to see what makes it or breaks it.
Please do not take this the wrong way. I know as a photographer, that i appreciate people's thoughts and opinions on my photo's because it only does one thing and that thing is improve. You would not be doing your job as a professional photographer to neglect your viewers thoughts that are not "satisfactory".
I'm totally open to criticism, but not if it's going to push me in the wrong direction. The work that you showed me is what I would call amateurish, not to be rude. I wouldn't want my work to look like that, so I would rather be picky about who I take advice from. It's not that I'm not open to what you're saying, it just doesn't help... I don't know how to say it without being rude, but I can't take advice too seriously from somebody who can't show me experience of their own which I can learn from - at least not critical advice... I can certainly take into account that you don't like what I do, and learn through that the reception my work has on your demographic. However, I'm not obliged to take any advice on "how to make it better", if I can't admire the work you do or show me.
That's why I said I won't post anymore photography on this forum. We have completely different goals in mind with photography, and yet I'm being insisted to follow advice from people who have no experience to back it. There's just no point to it... Like I said, I can understand the art behind the work that you like, but you don't seem to understand the setup and work involved in a professional shoot, or the polished work that we desire to produce. Until you can criticize me on equal footing, with both of us open to different views, then I shouldn't get involved. Show me first that you know something about what I would consider "good photography", then I will listen to your direction when you tell me I'm not getting there. But if you show me something I think is "amateur" then tell me that I'm not reaching that goal, there's nothing I need to do but keep doing what I'm doing.
Last edited by Neddog; 09-16-2009 at 12:01 AM.
Look, i don't have a preference, i thought you were trying to do stock photography. As for the lighting, i feel like it just doesn't flow. Seriously, that is all I have to say. It is not that I have a preference for a certain type of light. That would just be rude for me to have a standard and to have everyone meet that criteria. That is just stupid to do. I am just viewing your photo's and saying that the lighting just does not fit.
If you're talking about comparing my work with the link you posted, that work is broadly lit with fill light through the entire set. To me that's "uncontrolled lighting", and it's just not what I'm after... That's why I'm asking you to show me what you're after instead of just telling me "I need to improve". If I can see what you want, then I know whether this is something I want to pursue or not...
Trust me, I've given and received plenty of criticism in my life, and it has always been a lot more specific than this. This picture is overexposed, the contrast is too low, the composition is off, the depth of field is too shallow... I have never before coming to this forum EVER been told by somebody that I "need to improve" without being able to tell me why, then become upset with me that I'm not "taking advice". You're telling me that I need to take criticism, but I'm telling you that your critism isn't constructive.
By the way, this isn't stock photography. This work is for a modeling agency, for the models' portfolios.
PS - Please don't think I'm picking on you, International. I have certainly taken into account that you weren't the only one in this thread who didn't like my work, and I can glean some understanding from that on why. Just please... don't try to "teach" me when you're not qualified to. Let me know what you like and don't like, and leave it at that. Leave the "improvement" comments out of it until you can show me a portfolio of better work (hell, even if it's not your own). Agreed?
Last edited by Neddog; 09-16-2009 at 12:35 AM.
I like the work of impofmargeandfletch.com, he reminds me of dave hill. His control of those softboxes is pretty damn good, but I agree that style is overkill for most things, especially stuff like model portfolio photos.
In my opinion, your lighting 'does not fit' because of these reasons: firstly, you mixed tungsten and flash and skin tone of the model is weird (like in the last shot). Moreover, I know this is all about the models, but the background seems poorly lit and from what I can see there, it looks more like a simple basement than a glamorous casino. I guess you lit them mostly with ambient and one extra light - what it lacks is a bit of fill/highlight from another side or from the back to highlight the body shapes. Or for shots like the first one, where the models look good, you need to crop less tightly and have a more interesting (or plain black) background - the one you have there is cluttering your composition. Some light from the top for the table in the first shot would also make it stand out more, too. About the second shot - I don't find the model's face flattering. I don't know about you but for formal portraits, I like to have at least one eye not in shadow, looks weird otherwise. Thought about using a hair light to separate the model from the background better? Also, I don't think it's a good idea to cut off the feet if you are doing a full body shot.
Last edited by MuZ0NaZ; 09-18-2009 at 06:50 AM.
In need of a dose of ARIA.
In need of a ticket to Neo-Venezia.
Ivanova is god.
M'mmm I don't really like the style but I love the way you use the cards for effect.
I must say I love girl in first pic w/ white dress! I want that !!!!
Middle girl I think the clothes do not suit her, I think green dress is alittle too low like it is falling off,
I just briefly read that you want/are open to criticism and I would be glad to add :3 ~ nyooo
I'm melting as I think of youAnd even so, I'm too shy to say thatI Love You
The reason I wouldn't like this set is because of the models. Change them, seriously ._. I know, I'm mean for saying this but really, they're ruining the pictures.
||Thank you MaruDashi for the great set!||
[My anime story at http://www.scribd.com/doc/52668617/The-School-of-Violence-Story
or stalk my blog: http://www.animeforum.com/blog.php?117072
Stalky stalky stalky ]
Well, there's only one image where tungsten is mixed, and that's the overhead lamp on the model's hand in the one image - but that's part of the image. True I could have gelled it for a better mix, but that would be for just for one shot out of hundreds taken that day, so no I didn't even bring gels, not planning on needing them for one lamp shot. xD Good point, though.
As for the lighting on the background, the whole idea is that this wasn't shot in a glamorous casino. Thus, not looking like what it really is is a good thing, not a bad one, as the shots were done in a bar... I keep telling these guys to bring the girls to my studio where we can have decent lighting and background control, but they keeping re-booking on-location, but not at a good location. It would be nice if we all had the budget to shoot at any location we wanted, but this is real-life photography in the real working world, and we have to work with the best that we have. If you think the image looks cluttered with this background underlit, then how cluttered do you suppose it would look if the background was fully lit? Your two points are contradicting each other... The whole point of underlighting the background is to unclutter the image, and that's a technique which requires the skill of the photographer. I would have liked more light on the table though, but that's just from not having brought enough lights for group shots (which wasn't on my agenda).
Nope, no ambient light was used in any of these (in other words, all ambient light was blown out of the image). It's all flash lighting (and no I never shoot with just one light, lol). I'm really surprised you would think I use ambient light though, when it's quite obvious that all the light is falling on the models... ambient light has the exact opposite effect of what you're seeing here. If you really want to know how it was done, I gave a full explanation here on this photography forum: http://www.fourthirds-user.com/forum...ead.php?t=5140 Better to ask a photographer how he works, than to try to tell him, lol.
A hair light is definitely a good idea. If this wasn't a location shoot and I wasn't already lugging around 100 lbs. of equipment to it, I might have done something like that, but I had to work with a mobile set. Very good point though.
As for cutting off the feet on a full-body image, I assume you mean the last image since that was the only full-body shot? Only her toes were cut off but that was a shooting error, not a compositional error. I'm sure you can tell I didn't do that on purpose...
Last edited by Neddog; 09-23-2009 at 11:06 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)