PHOTOS PLEASE

[tnf]

I've been trying to achieve a look somewhat similar to what you did with that DJ picture for years sys0p and still can't quite get it.

Here's an example of an out of the camera shot and edited version.

I don't quite get what you're saying. Is the first sentence linked to the picture, or just a general comment?

If you want the look of the DJ shot, you need a ring flash and then to process it the way I do.

As for the image, you need to light and process in a way that either flatters the model, or deliberately draws out her flaws.

She's got a very pointy chin, so she needs a reflector or something to fill in the shadow under her chin. Her eyes are kind of close together, but she has a wide face. Either an illusion created by the eyes, or just a wide face. In either case, less direct light to bath part of her face in a shadow would thin her.

Like GKY said, the lighting is quite flat. In which case, she would benefit from some dodging and burning to give her features a bit of depth. Also, when you increase contrast to such a high level, you should be sure to reduce saturation slightly, as you've lost detail in the top, and the jeans are now an unnaturally deep blue.

I'd have also put her hair behind her back, maybe. Depending on how wide her neck was.

All of this is just hindsight though, plenty of the things I mentioned I would probably have missed if I'd have only had limited time with her.

Nice shot though, well posed and nicely processed.

Yea, I know the shot has a lot of work needed. Not a strength of mine for sure.

Regarding the DJ shot - and some of your portraits in general - I'm talking about the tones you achieved in the processing vs. the original shot. I don't think I'd called it 'hyper-real' (you've probably seen
shots classified as that type of processing with portraits that have a specific look to them). What I am talking about is achieving a look that might be classified as 'hyper real lite' - again, I don't expect an explanation because
I'm not even able to really quantify what it is I am talking about, but suffice it to say there is just a look regarding the tones of the image, the range of darks to lights, the way things are exaggerated a bit without being over the top, I don't know....

I just know there is a look I see in my head for the way I want a few of my processed portraits to look, and that I can't quite achieve it with the processing I am able to do. I think the starting point for my would be to learn how to do
the hyper-real portraits and then start tweaking from there. Searching for 'hyper real portraits' brings up images that are a little too overdone - but I could see myself achieving the look I am thinking of by getting to that point and then toning it down a bit. I haven't found a good hyper real tutorial that worked with the images I was starting with.

Sorry that doesn't make much sense.

And thanks for the feedback about my image. I realize I have a long, long way to go - but I'm glad to hear what I need work on. Too many people where I'm at are content to just keep telling each other that their mediocre work is great and they
don't progress at all - which keeps them right in that 'average' group of photographers that flood the market. I am in the start of my 3rd year of using a camera and I originally had a 5 year goal to be really bringing in the wedding business - so I'm on the track I am shooting for at the moment.

EDIT - I said the term 'hyper real' too many times.

[phantasmagoria]

I have a facebook album entitled boomer, into which I upload pictures of gastronomical monstrosities:

[lvlshot]http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/6044/imag0352o.jpg[/lvlshot]

[Yeahso]

Nah, you're making sense.

I don't really know how I achieve the look I do, I just use the tools photoshop has to push the image in a certain direction. Sometimes it'll go in two completely different directions during one process.

A list of things I do with generally every image that features heavy work:

import image into photoshop. (Sometimes import multiples of the same image in order to adust separately and blend.
.
decide tones/tonal ranges
.
accentuate or fade tonal ranges, dark edge transfers, specularity
.
clean up image. Removal of artifacts, debris, flaws, blemishes, signs of aging.
.
selectively mask out dark and light areas using feathered curves adjustments in order to create an even exposure value across the skin. Then use RGB curve adjustments to address flaws in colour tone created by colour casts and skin impurities.
.
minor dodging and burning to remove dark/light patches of skin accentuated by the curves adjustments.
.
begin "carving" of image by painting in highlights and shadows on separate layers.
.
selectively sharpen key areas

Generally every image I've posted here has had that process applied to it.

There's other steps in there as well, but they are all used on conjunction with those core techniques.

You shouldn't be looking for "how do I do that stuff" tutorials, because you'll just be taking someone else's style, which never works.

It's about experimenting with light in order to achieve a specific mood in your photos which can be accentuated in Photoshop. The work always begins with lighting though.

I'll get an example, one second

[Yeahso]

Here you go:

This is a test shot for a shoot I did in a gym. I was shooting a fighter for his promotional material, and I was setting up the lights and he hadn't arrived yet. Someone with a decent physique was in the gym training, so I called him over and got him to stand in the spot to make sure I had the lighting right:



I don't particularly like this picture, but it has, in a slightly over the top fashion, all of the details I mention above. Other stuff is a slight thinning of his waist on the left, the increase in roundness of his delt on the right, and a slight anti-clockwise tilt on his head to make it more straight.

The most important thing to note with the image, other than the fact that it[s a bit crap is that the look is already there in the original picture. All I did was accentuate it.

[Yeahso]

A better example:



Note that the lighting is what is creating the mood. All I've done again is accentuate what's already there. I removed his ear and placed the back of his head in shdow. Changed the shape of his head slightly, increased the specular highlights and brought out the detail in his hand-wrap.

You can really only get out of your image what you put in with light.

[tnf]

Thanks Sys. I think it finally hit me in reading your posts and looking at your work - I had a novice's epiphany I guess you'd say. I realized what I was missing was that I wasn't creating those specular highlights, etc., in the original shot with my lighting so there was no way I could get the look I wanted regardless.

I think I need to start shooting with brighter lights and a narrower aperture to kill more ambient light and allow me to control the lighting more with my flashes in many cases.

Don't know how this didn't occur to me before.

[duffman91]

Chicago

I was fucking hammered on this first shot (HDR). Made two noob mistakes: 1) left a UV filter on my lens and 2) tripod wasn't even straight... Fuck me.



Sober shots were ok... here's a few I like:









Full set: http://monroec.com/?p=493

[Wabbit]

I like the shot that's tilted best out of them all. Something about it.

[Yeahso]

Thanks Sys. I think it finally hit me in reading your posts and looking at your work - I had a novice's epiphany I guess you'd say. I realized what I was missing was that I wasn't creating those specular highlights, etc., in the original shot with my lighting so there was no way I could get the look I wanted regardless.

I think I need to start shooting with brighter lights and a narrower aperture to kill more ambient light and allow me to control the lighting more with my flashes in many cases.

Don't know how this didn't occur to me before.

These epiphanies never stop happening, and each time they do, you get smarter and sharper.

[vileliquid1026]

I have a facebook album entitled boomer, into which I upload pictures of gastronomical monstrosities:

[lvlshot]http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/6044/imag0352o.jpg[/lvlshot]

[Yeahso]

Just been to my new studio, it's going to be finished completely and ready to move in in just under two weeks.

Here's some pictures:





First shot is the actual shooting space. It has about 14ft of ceiling space, with a huge roller shutter that is essentially just one big removable wall, which means I can step out of the studio for large shots and keep the interior as an entire set-space. Shutters are controlled by a key fob. Whole interior area is going to be painted white, with laminate flooring, and plenty of pictures hung on the walls. Contemplating a ceiling rig for my lights.

Bottom two shots are of the second floor, which is going to function as my make=up room, post-production room and my office. It's going to have a large sofa area, makeup tables with a desk for my computer and a fridge.

Can't tell you how exciting I am by this.

[Don Carlos]

Looks nice dude - congrats

[mrd]

Looks sweet. I'm going to be starting work on my own studio soon too (for music though, not photos)... very exciting stuff indeed! Are you doing the work or have you hired someone?

[tnf]

Nice sysop. Was this a place you had built from the ground up or an existing building you are remodeling to suit your needs?

I'd love a studio but its going to take either my winning the lottery or perhaps seeing the wedding component of my business really take off in the next few years to happen.

[Yeahso]

Existing building that is being remodelled.

It's located on 86 acres of farmland that is being converted into a luxury small business park. I'm the first person in, so the first few months are going to be tough. No toilets or running water, just electricity.

Studio space can be surprisingly cheap, tnf, if you shop around and have patience. Took me over a year to find the right place at the right price, but you certainly don't have to be swimming in money to get something usable. There's probably loads of small spaces in your area.

[Yeahso]

I just bought an Wacom Intuos 4 large.

It's fucking amazing.

[andyman]

I got the attachments to hook up the camera to my cheapo meade telescope, the mount for the scope is real crappy so it takes some afro-engineering to keep it steady, but it works! 700mm focal length on my shoe that was hanging out to dry about 15-20ft away. Can't wait for darkness and moon shots and stuff. Not sure what the aperture on the telescope is.

[MKJ]

i can has veyron?

[GONNAFISTYA]

Noice.

[Tsakali]

what a shitty law, raping the front grill of a nice car with that ridiculous licence plate.

[Whiskey 7]

what a shitty law, raping the front grill of a nice car with that ridiculous licence plate.

Agreed.. That licence plate looks awful

[seremtan]

then again, it looks like bugatti didn't actually include a space for the license plate within their design, so they get what's coming to them. clearly they never expected anyone to drive one of these things on an actual public road

[Foo]

Naw, they just focused on making it look its best for the showroom PLUS they're trading on this one looking as close to its concept version as possible, which means no style-killing recess for the license plate. No question they definitely expected people to be driving the veyron on public roads, though.

I like how the car behind looks like it got left in the playground of the special ed school when it was 'red sharpie' play day.

[Eraser]

i can has veyron?

That car is due for it's next MOT test on march 24, 2013
It was put on name on februari 3, 2010
The owner has payed € 451,000 on BPM (which is a tax the first person that buys a car has to pay)

It's fuel consumption is as follows:
- City: 40.40 l/100km
- B roads: 14.70 l/100km
- Combined: 24.10 l/100km

It generates 571 grams of CO2 per kilometer and has the worst fuel efficiency classification possible for Dutch cars.

[Yeahso]

Naw, they just focused on making it look its best for the showroom PLUS they're trading on this one looking as close to its concept version as possible, which means no style-killing recess for the license plate. No question they definitely expected people to be driving the veyron on public roads, though.

I like how the car behind looks like it got left in the playground of the special ed school when it was 'red sharpie' play day.

I'd imagine most of their intended or expected recipients would've been from the middle-east, where laws generally only apply to the poor. They probably didn't expect any of their buyers to need a front license plate.