Karen I - Critique please

[davidc]

This is a "first pass" at a shot taken on a recent photoshoot and I wondered what people make of it? Though the original isn't as dark as this, in this case I've experimented with a more high contrast look & feel to create a moody atmosphere.

Feedback appreciated, don't hold back....

10668512915_513bf4828e_z.jpg (108.83 KiB) Viewed 6177 times

[davidc]

A mono version is here, the result of more experimentation

http://flickr.com/gp/cedarsphoto/97U521

[Nina]

The color image appears to dark on my monitor for my liking. The black and white is very good, the contrast works well and the mood created is a touch of mystery.

[Mike Farley]

A moody shot which works well in parts. I like the way that the model is looking into the camera and there is a sense of allure and mystery. What I find slightly troubling is that the one eye we can see is just a tad too dark. It is the most important part of the image and grabs the attention, but it seems that you are almost trying to hide it by placing it in the shadow area. I also wonder about the out of focus arm and hand. The ring is a highlight, competing for attention with the eye and is better lit, but it is not sharp. What is that about?

Personally I find the image confused and it is unclear what you are trying to convey. I think that it would have been a better image without the arm, the eye better lit and cropped just below the bottom of her dress. More conventional, perhaps, which does not seem to be your intention here. You are tackling something which is difficult to do well, so you are to be applauded for a reasonable effort in what is presumably a first attempt. It is the sort of thing which needs practice to acquire the level of finesse to succeed with this type of shot.

[davidc]

A moody shot which works well in parts. I like the way that the model is looking into the camera and there is a sense of allure and mystery. What I find slightly troubling is that the one eye we can see is just a tad too dark. It is the most important part of the image and grabs the attention, but it seems that you are almost trying to hide it by placing it in the shadow area. I also wonder about the out of focus arm and hand. The ring is a highlight, competing for attention with the eye and is better lit, but it is not sharp. What is that about?

Personally I find the image confused and it is unclear what you are trying to convey. I think that it would have been a better image without the arm, the eye better lit and cropped just below the bottom of her dress. More conventional, perhaps, which does not seem to be your intention here. You are tackling something which is difficult to do well, so you are to be applauded for a reasonable effort in what is presumably a first attempt. It is the sort of thing which needs practice to acquire the level of finesse to succeed with this type of shot.

Interesting critique, thanks Will break it down to reply to various bits that I did and didn't think about at the time.

What I find slightly troubling is that the one eye we can see is just a tad too dark.

I agree it is probably too dark, trouble is if I selectively dodge it then it looked cartoonish! By which I mean I struggled to find a line where it was bright enough to see detail (harder in brown eyes) but that didn't just scream photoshopped. I'll have another go as the eye SHOULD, as you say, be the focal point. I was hoping the catchlight giving the impression of the eye without putting it there boldly for all to see was going to work better One to revisit.

In terms of lighting the eye better though, that didn't work at all. Moving the light to the other side of the face lost the light on her hair, adding texture, and it absolutely removed shadows leaving the face flat. Well lit but totally flat and that rarely makes for an interesting portrait outside of a pure fashion shoot.

I also wonder about the out of focus arm and hand. The ring is a highlight, competing for attention with the eye and is better lit, but it is not sharp. What is that about?

The arm was the bit I was LEAST pleased about admittedly, but she was holding the pose from the previous photographer and, being a bit nervous, I didn't want to confuse her. I directed her to move her hair over one eye to try to get the allure look (which personally I think has worked). Though having said that, the only shot I got where the arm looked least awkward was this one

The ring I actually quite like It's shot at a large aperture to get a pleasing bokeh and to be honest, I like the ring. I'd disagree it's distracting, more a point of interest and as you know I don't subscribe to the opinion that the main subject should be the brightest part. It gives the impression of the ring without needing to be sharp enough to distract and isn't THAT bright, particularly when compared to her face

I think that it would have been a better image without the arm, the eye better lit and cropped just below the bottom of her dress.

I've covered why better lighting on the eye wouldn't have worked, and how I agree about the arm. Though I could have gone for a shot that included her body, that wouldn't be the portrait I was going for and is a different shot entirely really (and I have over shots of those).

You are tackling something which is difficult to do well, so you are to be applauded for a reasonable effort in what is presumably a first attempt.

Thanks - not quite a first effort though, I've done it already in the 365 a few times

I'll try an alternate version toning down the ring and boosting the eye without making it a caricature. As an experiment in "moodifying" the original image I think it's OK but not excellent and that the mono version worked better.

[Mike Farley]

As ever, we disagree about certain points. That's not important and what really matters is that the shot works for you regardless of anyone else's opinion. I do not imagine that getting everything right to produce an image outside of the norm is ever going to be easy. You have highlighted the difficulties in setting up the lighting and working with an inexperienced model cannot have helped either.

[davidc]

I agree, the disagreement is not a problem - in fact, I like it that we do because it forces me to think a different way and try to justify a choice. If, based on comments, I can't then I feel I've learned something

[davidc]

k1_b.jpg (107.3 KiB) Viewed 6148 times

I've tried dodging the eye and burning the other highlights as recommended. To me, this now just looks unrealistic?

[Mike Farley]

I agree, the disagreement is not a problem - in fact, I like it that we do because it forces me to think a different way and try to justify a choice. If, based on comments, I can't then I feel I've learned something

I would go further and say that even if you disagree with another person's comments, it still gives you an insight into how others think. You will never produce an image which will please absolutely everybody (judges are proof of that ), but that kind of information can be useful.

[Mike Farley]

I've tried dodging the eye and burning the other highlights as recommended. To me, this now just looks unrealistic?

Unfortunately you are coming up against the way that digital sensors work. It turns out that they are linear devices and each drop in 1 EV from the lightest to the darkest areas of the images halves the number of tonal values captured. It does not take long before you are down to single figures. The upside is that people do not normally expect to see detail in shadow areas, so it is not normally an issue unless you are trying to do a post capture enhancement as in this instance.

This characteristic of digital sensors also highlights just how critical accurate exposure is. Yes, shooting in Raw allows for correction of a multitude of comditions, but just one stop under exposure means that you have halved the tonal range which it would have been possible to record across the entire image.

FWIW, I feel that the changes you have made have improved matters and the result does not seem to me as bad as you suggest. The ring is less obtrusive and the eye looks better, so there is less competition between them. The changes are fairly subtle, although assessing a small JPEG means that I cannot necessarily judge the overall result. Dodging an overly dark area is always going to be problemmatic for the reasons just stated and highlights the importance of getting as much as possible right in camera.