First attempt of portraits

[SteamingDwarf]

As the title suggests I usually shoot sport daily ice hockey but wanted to try something different and get some practice in as a friend is having a baby and I offered to take some pictures of the family when the baby arrives. So I practiced using my wife as a subject she wasn't overly keen so only got a couple I could use.

1.
untitled-0096.jpg by stu widdows, on Flickr

2.
untitled-0105.jpg by stu widdows, on Flickr

Comments and tip are greatly welcomed

[Parsen66]

Re: First attempt of portraits

I think the mono is really lovely, you're good lady much be pleased with that ? The top one looks a bit off with the WB in my opinion

[Stan]

Re: First attempt of portraits

Agree with Alan

Stan

[antoeknee]

Re: First attempt of portraits

Agree first is better of two. Might be useful to have a catch light in the eye as this will bring the subject 'to life'.

[SteamingDwarf]

Re: First attempt of portraits

I think the mono is really lovely, you're good lady much be pleased with that ? The top one looks a bit off with the WB in my opinion

Yes she was pleased with the mono one. I will try some more and try to get a better WB I think.
Thanks

[SteamingDwarf]

Re: First attempt of portraits

Agree first is better of two. Might be useful to have a catch light in the eye as this will bring the subject 'to life'.

Thanks for the tip. I shall give it ago.

[Dave61]

Re: First attempt of portraits

That mono one is a cracker

[Redgrape]

Re: First attempt of portraits

Lovely mono portrait

Sue

[AlexR!]

Re: First attempt of portraits

Stu, that mono works really well for me, and just goes to show that being brave and cropping a bit of the head can work when it places the face perfectly into the frame. If you wanted to experiment a bit further, you could play around with gaining a catch light and/or adding side lighting, but if not, you clearly already have the skills to do a good job with your friend.

[tesarver]

Re: First attempt of portraits

As with most of the others, I like the mono version as well. When doing portraits, I will start the session photographing the subject holding a 18% gray card. By doing that, then I can correctly set the white balance for the session. If you are shooting raw, the you can correctly set the WB in post processing.

Tom

[Parsen66]

Re: First attempt of portraits

As with most of the others, I like the mono version as well. When doing portraits, I will start the session photographing the subject holding a 18% gray card. By doing that, then I can correctly set the white balance for the session. If you are shooting raw, the you can correctly set the WB in post processing.

Tom

Good advise Tom, or use the WB dropper tool within LR and click on something that should be white

[SteamingDwarf]

Re: First attempt of portraits

That mono one is a cracker

Thank you

[SteamingDwarf]

Re: First attempt of portraits

Stu, that mono works really well for me, and just goes to show that being brave and cropping a bit of the head can work when it places the face perfectly into the frame. If you wanted to experiment a bit further, you could play around with gaining a catch light and/or adding side lighting, but if not, you clearly already have the skills to do a good job with your friend.

Thank you very much, I'm going to have a play round at the weekend I think.

[SteamingDwarf]

Re: First attempt of portraits

As with most of the others, I like the mono version as well. When doing portraits, I will start the session photographing the subject holding a 18% gray card. By doing that, then I can correctly set the white balance for the session. If you are shooting raw, the you can correctly set the WB in post processing.

Tom

Thank you for the tip I shall try it

[H2OJunkie]

Re: First attempt of portraits

I am in agreement with the others except the mono is about on par with the color. With the color removed the WB sets it up for B&W (reddish usually produces good B&W). I am going to add a couple of suggestions. You have a double catch light in the eyes, one high, one low and very small. I would like to know what lighting you used if you don't mind. Also because the hair is poorly lit it resulted in lost fine hair detail. If I know what lighting you used I may be able to give you a hint to improve both. One suggestion, on Flicker include your EXIF data. It will make those offering thoughts info on how it was shot that will be more pointed to your situation.

I would want a more centered and larger catch light in the eyes. That will make them stick out more. One trick you can use in those instances where lighting is limited is your on-camera flash turned way down to cause a catch light but have no effect on the image. This is generally easy to do if portrait ISO setting is ISO 100.

A bounced flash will produce generally good hair lights if the roof is such to facilitate it. If it isn't, use a reflector on a boom over the subject's head to bounce flash down to her hair to bring out the hair. Distance between the subject and the reflector will produce varying results. Some trial and error may be needed.

I personally prefer to WB in camera so I don't have to do it at the computer. I prefer color accuracy rather than guessing in Photoshop if you don't have true white, true black or 15% gray in the image. Auto WB usually works well except in upper ISOs and when multiple light sources are involved. I use one like this:

impact_qbp_g_22_quickbalance_panel_18_percent_gray_22_1383328505000_981249.jpg

I am not a fan of ExpoDisc as it sits directly on the lens and meters reflected light, not the light actually hitting the subject. That is my personal opinion after testing multiple types of WB tools but others opinions may differ from mine.