is this a good photo?
Discussion
14-7 said:
I understand what you were trying to do but for me the whole photo is too bright and not in focus.
no, its from a "pro" (semi-pro?) i like to see all of my dogs its way too bright for me
maybe im just not arty enough?
wherever i am theres always at least 1 in my line of sight
PJ S said:
Spot focus on the eye or between the two, OIS engaged if handheld, and f5.6, ISO 200-400 to give fast shutter speeds.
on what size lens given ones pocket bottoms are rushing away from my hands faster than a fast thing going very fast on St Fast's day in the village of Fast-on-SeaUpatdawn said:
no, its from a "pro" (semi-pro?) i like to see all of my dogs
its way too bright for me
maybe im just not arty enough?
He's gone for the 'white background look' but failed because his exposure and lighting are wrong. White things on white backgrounds are never easy; sometimes I use black for a contrast instead.its way too bright for me
maybe im just not arty enough?
The dog also looks like it's about to slide off into oblivion. I hate stupid angles; it's as though they're used to tart up an otherwise bad shot. Oh actually...
You can see from the eyes there are two light sources which is fine in principle but he just hasn't paid attention to the exposure. I don't like the pink cloth under his paws, it's distracting. Maybe it's there so you don't notice the back of the dog is missing.
Upatdawn said:
whats the best lighting for a portrait, flash or floods?
You may mean flash or continuous. It doesn't matter much here, what counts is number of lights, what's on the front of them (modifiers eg softboxes) and relative power.I'll vote no as well.
Pro-studio session and that was one of the supplied images?
Over exposed, focus looks soft, odd angle and far too much white background around the missing dog.
If that is representative of the standard of the images I'd be complaining. I can see an 'artistic' angle if it was intentional but it doesn't work for me.
It's unlikely a pro would supply all the images taken. They would take a load, review, delete the bad and select some for editing/supply to the client. If the rest of the shots were good, I wouldn't worry about it, it's likely that a bad one just slipped the net.
I had similar (over exposure) happen with a shot of a friend, first shot to test flash power and it was far too bright. Nearly deleted it on camera before uploading but decided to see how good Lightroom's highlight recovery worked from raw files. It came out really well after moving a few sliders
<ETA> Just to clarify was this from a studio session or one you tried yourself?
As for lenses, take you pick. I'd probably use my 70-200mm, It has a good range and focuses quickly. The longer length would allow me to be far enough back not to be a distraction.
Pro-studio session and that was one of the supplied images?
Over exposed, focus looks soft, odd angle and far too much white background around the missing dog.
If that is representative of the standard of the images I'd be complaining. I can see an 'artistic' angle if it was intentional but it doesn't work for me.
It's unlikely a pro would supply all the images taken. They would take a load, review, delete the bad and select some for editing/supply to the client. If the rest of the shots were good, I wouldn't worry about it, it's likely that a bad one just slipped the net.
I had similar (over exposure) happen with a shot of a friend, first shot to test flash power and it was far too bright. Nearly deleted it on camera before uploading but decided to see how good Lightroom's highlight recovery worked from raw files. It came out really well after moving a few sliders
<ETA> Just to clarify was this from a studio session or one you tried yourself?
As for lenses, take you pick. I'd probably use my 70-200mm, It has a good range and focuses quickly. The longer length would allow me to be far enough back not to be a distraction.
Edited by Xerstead on Saturday 30th March 11:30
Upatdawn said:
PJ S said:
Spot focus on the eye or between the two, OIS engaged if handheld, and f5.6, ISO 200-400 to give fast shutter speeds.
on what size lens given ones pocket bottoms are rushing away from my hands faster than a fast thing going very fast on St Fast's day in the village of Fast-on-SeaIt's only a starting point upon which to build through experimentation to see which settings gives the most pleasing result.
But if you can find the spare pennies, then either a 35 or 50mm prime lens.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff