Portrait of My Roommate Sean [Pic Attached]

[McMadCow]

I shot this on saturday night. My roommate and a neighbor and I set up some lights and burned up a bunch of rolls of film. He's not as pretty as the models I usually have in front of me, but I'm pretty happy with the results here. Shots of my pretty neighbor girl will be posted when I have them scanned...
Shot with my 50mm. Around f4. Tri-X 400. Comments and critique are appreciated!

[mtbbrian]

Even though this isn't a portrait of a sexy woman, this is yet another fine portrait from you MMC.
It shows a lot of character.
I would have liked to see a bit more of his one eye, but it works!
Brian

[schrackman]

Great, great b/w treatment, although I feel there needs to be a bit more to the left side of the frame. But otherwise a wonderful portrait.

[Ronnoco]

A little too tight in the framing, a need for better lighting on the right side of the hair, shoulder etc., and the eye on the left should not be obscured by the hat.

Ronnoco

[Yoyo Szeto]

Hi McMadCow,
The shot tells us a lot about the guy's personality. He seems very sceptical about you. Also, he must be very close to you as he dresses in a casual fashion: 1. white vest can be seen, 2. the sweater is unbuttoned. The fingers of the guy are black-rimmed. Did you take the shot while he was taking a break from his work? Is he a mechanic? Overall, I think it is a successful protrait.
yoyo

[McMadCow]

Oh Ronnoco, you so crazy!
Thanks for all the input so far. Yoyo Szeto wins! Sean is a mechanic, in addition to whatever he's up to after hours. This wasn't taken during a break from work, rather more like midnight or so.
The one obscured eye was intentional... I guess the success of that decision is a matter of personal preference.

[mtbbrian]

I guess the success of that decision is a matter of personal preference.

Well said, and when you consistently show good, interesting work, you can say that....
Brian
:thumbsup:

[McMadCow]

Hmmm, the original shot isn't working now. Here's a link to another source. Thanks again to all who have taken the time to critique!

[Ronnoco]

[QUOTE=McMadCow]Oh Ronnoco, you so crazy!
QUOTE]

Yeah, and you have such a knack for rationalizing weaknesses in technique as intentional. Then again, perhaps they are.

Ronnoco

[McMadCow]

Yeah, and you have such a knack for rationalizing weaknesses in technique as intentional. Then again, perhaps they are.

Ronnoco

We've had this discussion before, but I think it bears repeating since so many people take issue with your critiques. I spend quite a bit of time and money in and out of the classroom trying to develop and refine a good "technique". If my shot was over/underexposed or out of focus or suffered from a confusing DOF, then I would welcome your critique and suggestions for improvement. If my choice to obscure one eye or to shoot close in was causing the viewer to be disoriented or to miss out on some crucial message that the photo was conveying, then I would CERTAINLY welcome your critiques and suggestions for improvement. But what we are treated to time and again, just as in your critique here, is a checklist of things we have done "wrong". And your standards of critique are based on photographic competition... a venue that many many MANY serious photographers would scoff at becoming a part of. I don't give a crap if my photos don't jive with the standards of portrait competition, but it's pretty arrogant to suggest that I'm rationalizing mistakes and oversights simply because you think there's a "correct way" to capture someone's image on film.
I won't question your professional credentials as others here have in the past, but I will say that when I put up a shot for critique that I hope to get an honest evaluation based on technical merit and artistic choice. I critique a picture based on the feelings it evokes and my impressions on how it can be improved to further enhance that feeling. I highly doubt that judging an image off of a predetermined checklist does anything to improve an aspiring photographer's artistic eye.
Hopefully since I've become a member of this board my technical grasp of photography has improved and hopefully I've managed to develop a style I can call my own. I hope others can benefit from the same wealth of knowledge available here and go out and make their own exciting photos. I see too many boring ones all around day-in and day-out.

[ChowChi-Ching]

This really isn't my type of photo, but I like the way it was done, however, I would have preffered that the cigarette was a little more in focus. Just my two cents though.

[CLKunst]

Hey Now MadMcCow!

Always good to see your work on the board! Sean is a very interesting person to look at. I knew at once he was a mechanic just from his general dress and finger nail state. He reminds me somehow of a mix between a Hemingway character and an old boyfriend.

I have no problem with your DOF, composition or the tightness of the shot and the tones throughout are fine. I only have two little nit picks. One there is a wall seam or door crack right behind his head. Since it doesn't continue in the picture further down why not do away with it altogether? Not sure if you're into the PS or not but it's worth a thought. The other is the harsh shadow from the brim of his hat right over his "good" eye. The hat brim shape is framing and repeating his eye shape so perfectly and then there's this rude little shadow that breaks the line. Not sure if there was anything you could do about that.

Overall there is character by the bucket with this image and illustrates that you, MMC, make beautiful portraits with more than just pretty legs and faces!

Nice.

[yogestee]

McMadCow,,I like the B/W treatment of this image...It adds a touch of mystery as does obscuring his eye..The framing is spot on IMHO,,,then again I like tightly framed portraits..Only one small point,,,I would have shot your roommate more at eye level and maybe one of him looking directly into the lens...That would have been an entirely different look but this one works too..

Horses for courses..


Jurgen
Australia

[yogestee]

We've had this discussion before, but I think it bears repeating since so many people take issue with your critiques. I spend quite a bit of time and money in and out of the classroom trying to develop and refine a good "technique". If my shot was over/underexposed or out of focus or suffered from a confusing DOF, then I would welcome your critique and suggestions for improvement. If my choice to obscure one eye or to shoot close in was causing the viewer to be disoriented or to miss out on some crucial message that the photo was conveying, then I would CERTAINLY welcome your critiques and suggestions for improvement. But what we are treated to time and again, just as in your critique here, is a checklist of things we have done "wrong". And your standards of critique are based on photographic competition... a venue that many many MANY serious photographers would scoff at becoming a part of. I don't give a crap if my photos don't jive with the standards of portrait competition, but it's pretty arrogant to suggest that I'm rationalizing mistakes and oversights simply because you think there's a "correct way" to capture someone's image on film.
I won't question your professional credentials as others here have in the past, but I will say that when I put up a shot for critique that I hope to get an honest evaluation based on technical merit and artistic choice. I critique a picture based on the feelings it evokes and my impressions on how it can be improved to further enhance that feeling. I highly doubt that judging an image off of a predetermined checklist does anything to improve an aspiring photographer's artistic eye.
Hopefully since I've become a member of this board my technical grasp of photography has improved and hopefully I've managed to develop a style I can call my own. I hope others can benefit from the same wealth of knowledge available here and go out and make their own exciting photos. I see too many boring ones all around day-in and day-out.

Amen McMadCow!!!!

There are people in this forum who enjoy pulling an image apart pointing out the weaknesses but never give advise on how the image can be improved..These same people never post their work for critique..These arm chair photographers lack credibility..They shall remain nameless..

Jurgen
Australia

[Anbesol]

I wouldve liked to have seen more of the left side - it got cut off a smidgen with the tips of his hair and that hurts it for me. outside of that, great tonal range and contrast, very cool angle as well...

[mtbbrian]

I won't have any name calling or any kind of bashing here.
Please remember what this forum is about, being constructive in your comments in an attempt to help your fellow photographer improve his or her craft.
I am not seeing a lot of that going on at the moment.
Brian

[Seb]

I shot this on saturday night. My roommate and a neighbor and I set up some lights and burned up a bunch of rolls of film. He's not as pretty as the models I usually have in front of me, but I'm pretty happy with the results here. Shots of my pretty neighbor girl will be posted when I have them scanned...
Shot with my 50mm. Around f4. Tri-X 400. Comments and critique are appreciated!

McMadCow,

I can't decide if I feel comfortable with the hidden eye as it is currently presented. Actually, I think that the picture would be less ambiguous is Sean was wearing is cap slightly lower (or perhaps slightly twisted/turned) so his right eye is entierly covered rather than almost covered.

Also, I think that I have to agree with Ronnoco on the fact that there should be a little more breathing space on the left side of the picture.

That being said, I think that this is a strong portrait that display a whole lot of personality and that's what it's all about as I see it. The tonal range is especially great. In fact I think that the tones here are the best you ever produced. The sharpness is fine too. I like the skin and clothes textures. Finally, I believe that the lighting is appropriate. The slight darkness at the right helps to put even more emphasis on Sean face.

Seb

[McMadCow]

Thanks for all the continued comments! It seems like going with a single eye is about a 50% success here, and that's cool. I definitely preferred it at the time and I think I'd stick with that, but if I had the option to reshoot I think I'd adjust my lighting to keep that hat shadow away from the exposed eye.
Also, ChowChi-Ching: good catch on the cigarette. I should have adjusted my DOF to include it. I didn't notice it before your comment, but now I totally agree with you.

Here's another shot of Sean, a different setup. The original is my personal favorite, but I liked this one as well:


Any preferences?

[mpreslar]

McMadCow,

The first one is definately the artistic champion of the two, though the second shot has it's merits. I think the first shot, with the shadow over the eye decreased and the covered eye entirely covered would be spot on, with or without the DOF blurring the tip of the cigarette and the brim of the cap. (Part of me likes the blurred cigarette tip...)

As for the second, The xmas light in the top left, the posture of the arm holding the hat and the partial bottle all seem distractions from the main focus of the image. A crop right above the bottle top on the bottom and to the left of his hair on the left would eliminate these distractions and, IMO, improve the portrait.

Great work!

[mtbbrian]

Any preferences?

The first one, is much better.
This second one, isn't as deep.
Brian