Walk towards the camera, click, Thank you !

[armando_m]

From a couple of weeks ago

I did a session for the this guy who makes jewelry accessories, the model wanted a shot of her showing off in her skirt, and I had to comply



Overcast, one of camera flash to the right of the camera

[dl4449]

Pict not showing for me

[DurtGurl]

I like the composition and colors. However, I am not sure the angle of the leg coming directly towards the viewer is the most flattering for the model. I am far from a fashion photographer, but I'm guessing her leg (specifically the knee and shin) would look much better from a slightly different angle.

[GB1]

Armando - this one isn't displaying. Looks like a flaky connection.

[armando_m]

how about now ?

[GB1]

Armando - It appeared. Very nice. Good exposure, very well composed, very sharp. Did you smooth her a bit, or is she so young that she looks like this already? If you did touch her up, I think you did a good job. I love her expression - she could do runway.

Nothing really to critique, other than the question "Why..." would a model in heels be walking though the grass on a slight embankment like this...? I would prefer her to be in an adventure-hiking outfit. I think we shoot where we can, but to move our shots to the next level, it takes planning for all the elements: model, make up, lighting, location, plus probably a few more I can't recall right now.

GB

[armando_m]

Skin filter ? yes
Although she looks quite good to begin with

Why walk in the grassy incline ? well we were shooting in the woods and she just wanted to show off her skirt, rather than appearing static

Sure I rather do this in an urban setting , with nice modern buildings, and electric lights

Thanks!

[Don Schaeffer]

I find this a very sexy photo. I wonder why she's coming at me like that. (lol)

[draymorton]

Well done, as usual. Great lighting, pose, expression, wardrobe. I like that the angle of her head contradicts that of the field/horizon. And that subtly backlit hair.

Her face looks too retouched for some reason, though, which keeps this image from being as good as it could be. Good news is that's an easy fix. And the bg looks noisy (or something). As for the leg.... some retouching and liquifying may help with that. Not a huge deal, in any case.

As for setting... there are no "whys" in fashion. Incongruity rules. That's the great thing about fashion.

[armando_m]

Processing yes , a bit extreme, here is a version much closer to SOOC

[AgingEyes]

You sure it wasn't her leg...

I quite like the second version. Hmmm...may be somewhere between the first and the second one?

[GB1]

Hmm, I actually prefer the first two versions' color over the last even though the last version is more 'classical' w.r.t. the rules (warmer, more colorful, etc).

[Adamo]

I couldn't agree more. The first two look more professional, the model stands out and the balance is nice. The last one looks more like a test shot, and for me, the weeds stand out more.

The only thing I can't get past is it reminds me of the Angelina Jolie MEME that was going around from her awards show dress.

[draymorton]

Looking again and I agree that the processing in the original image is fantastic. The color work is spot-on. And I love the lighting on her. What kind of modifier did you use?

Again, the facial retouch is my major gripe. It shouts "surface blur" to me. Something a bit closer to the "almost SOOC" would be a lot better.

Do you have a version of that last image that is a little larger, about the same size as your second post? And may I try something with it? Either way's cool. I'm still learning this stuff, too, and just wanted to see if my retouching instincts are right.

EDIT: I should add that heavy retouching isn't necessarily a bad thing if you're going for that Tom Ford/Vanity Fair/Porcelain Doll look. There definitely is a time and place for it, if it's done correctly.

[geraldb]

From a couple of weeks ago

I did a session for the this guy who makes jewelry accessories, the model wanted a shot of her showing off in her skirt, and I had to comply

From what you said, you're hired by the guy not the model, she obviously wanted to show herself not the jewelry she's advertising. Jewelry shoots are usually close ups of the jewelry that show more detail. Was the guy satisfied?

[armando_m]

Geraldb, I did the close up shots too and yes he was happy with I gave him, and this was a fun shot before she changed her wardrobe.

Dray,
I had a single naked flash right of camera
manual exposure for ambient light -1/3 or so ,
left the remote flash TTL do its job

the first image has a lot of clarity added, and then I reduced to 0 on her face, also desaturated it some
then colorefex pro filters
Skin softener on her skin
glamour glow on her face this I think is what breaks the first image
contrast only with desaturation , soft contrast to -100%
cropped to 10x8
One good reason to get photo shop would be to be able to go and turn layers on and off, at present I use lightroom and all these edits are on copies of the files with no way to know what was done once it is saved

second version
capture nx2 processing
fix the white balance
added some highpass filter
croppedd to 8x10

1400 wide version click

[draymorton]

Thanks, armando. Beautiful lighting for a bare flash!

Don't know if I'm out of line posting this, but I tried some dodge/burn contouring (no smoothing - she didn't really need it). I was trying to give her face just a little shape and depth, both of which I thought were lacking in the original post. Don't know if it works or not.

[armando_m]

Thanks Dray,

It works

I've done that sculpting with dodge and burn on other images, I didn't think it was necessary here but hey! Sure it is an improvement

Thanks!

[geraldb]

After looking at it again, I like the girl very much but not the location especially the angled horizon, I find it distracting. I'd have shot it in a wooded area with trees and no horizon.