Hit me with the critique!

davidgp said:

davidgp wrote:

Well, let me offer a contrarian point of view... I really like what you have attempted, including the flare and the foreground branches. The execution of both could have been better but I like the attempt as is; some improvements and it would be excellent.

The style reminds me of http://fstoppers.com/using-ordinary-objects-in-the-foreground-to-create-interesting-images

I encourage you to stick with your approach and try a second attempt.

David

Click to expand...

Yes, different styles for different folks - that's the way it should be.. My only suggestion to the OP would be to keep it as natural as possible (e.g. use natural flare as opposed to Photoshop'ed). Some interesting shots in the link provided

I would have used natural flare, but simply couldn't wait the remaining four five hours for the sun to get low enough. I don't really like photoshopping but hey, there is no other way.

Well, I like the first one except for the blob in the lower right.

The drive for the style came from us getting our heads together and trying to mimic Emily Soto, so the flares, desaturation and foreground objects are all intentional, just not executed quite as well as planned!

SelSol said:

SelSol wrote:

Here's a more traditional one done, same day, no effects, nothing, ripped straight from the card.

Click to expand...

Less problems, more conventional, but I find the lighting on face too flat and uninteresting.



--
Sam K., NYC

skanter said:

skanter wrote:

skanter said:

SelSol wrote:

Here's a more traditional one done, same day, no effects, nothing, ripped straight from the card.

Click to expand...

Less problems, more conventional, but I find the lighting on face too flat and uninteresting.

Click to expand...

+1

Right. The lower half of the photo has much better modeling (of the light) than the upper.

R2



--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.

Looks fantastic. Photos not bad either

SelSol said:

SelSol wrote:

OK, so a friend asked me to do some portrait shots that were a bit different, rather than the usual stuff you see in studios. So, here's the effort, hit me with the critique! Shot on a 7D with 70-200 F2.8 non OS version.

Click to expand...

The first image was clearly more ambitious ! The second has a light that i do not like - direct unlight is not good - even if the model i very cute - indirect but contrasty light under a tree on a sunny day or something would make her look really good.

As others have said the lower right corner is not what you wanted to achieve. I do not know how the light was , but it does not look quite right for your models face. Also the low saturation and high key image makes her look like a zombie , almost white lips etc...somehow too flat contrast - perhaps intended , but does not work for me

The place looks like interesting - can you use it again? I would like to see an image with more mysticism or magic. Perhaps you can play a little with your software if you do not have time to re-shoot ?

Very creative, not bad! I would have controlled the stream of light to the upper right of the photo so that it does not "overpower" the face of the model, but generally a good attempt for me.