Critique for Rich

Rich is really just starting out at this photography lark, so I hope to cover in this critique some basic starting techniques for all photographers new to this glamour / portraiture genre.

The fundamental issue with both of these shots is the lens is zoomed to too wide an angle.

If I had to guess I would say we're round the 30mm mark here (with crop factor) and what this is doing is distorting the image. This is a fairly common issue for new starters, especially when tight on space, but here's a rule of thumb. Never go below 50mm and if you can keep it out to 75mm-100mm. These will produce images which are less distorted.

I like this image, I like the somewhat sassy pose, the shirt hints, but does not reveal, which makes it sexier. The direct eye contact is good, lips open would be better. Rich needs to have a look at skin smoothing techniques - the simplest is the Gaussian blur layer technique, there are lots of different tutorials out there on this subject. But skin smoothing sorts the men from the boys.

Good glamour pose, though the hands look a little large. There's a nice loss of focus in the background. The two big issues I have here are the eyes, which have had to turn to far, the face could have been turned more to camera. The second is the way the picture frame on the wall intersects the models head.

Lovely high-key / low-key combination shot. The model looks great, the legs look terrifically long. Look at how the high-heel is helping to shape and lengthen the leg. It's hard to see here - but on the hi-res version it looks like the eyes are just not quite closed and that bothers me. Eyes should be open or closed, part-closed never looks right to me.

Interesting idea and pose, but it doesn't quite add-up to me. Like the lighting though.

I'm not sure if the fall-off in light at the bottom of the frame is deliberate or accidental. This is a striking image at first glance, but sadly has a lot of flaws in it which means it doesn't stand-up to a good look. The eyes are awkward, the tummy and torso has some bad wrinkles because of the pose - it's the photographers job to spot those, because the model can't tell. The image in the frame is slightly drunk - it tips to one side. Nevertheless, this is a striking image.

I love these two, again the power of natural light - some days you just can't beat it. These shots really make the most of the models legs and I love the camera angle on the scene.

OK, apart from the bit of shoe bottom left, this is striking. While I'm not bothered by the line running across the floor, it would be better if it was truly horizontal (which would probably also crop out the foot).

The lighting is very hard on the face and I think some skin softening would be more flattering to the model. However, the lighting has brought out wonderful shape in the face and the lovely structure in the collar bones.

This one's a bit of a nothing shot to me. I'm mostly not happy about the far eye, it's neither in, nor out of shot. But more than that, I'm just not sure what this image is showing me.

Love this very lo-key and cheeky image, very mysterious yet happy. I really like that paradox in the shot. Under other circumstances I might complain about the large hand and the underlit eyes, but on this image it works. Think it might make a good black and white.

I understand where you were coming from with the shoe, but it just needs a little more clarity on the shoe to really make this work. The models face is slightly squashed on the hand as well. On both this shot and the previous one it would be interesting to see what a little hair-light would do - just to separate out the model from the background. I think in this image it would help, and maybe in the previous one not, but interesting to try.

These are a pretty good set though - it's a lot better than most people manage on their first studio shoot.

share:  email    facebook    pinterest    twitter    reddit    reddit img  

---

---