Portrait: My first time using a strobe and background

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

One of a series of first tries - I know its harsh contrast - thats intentional ...
No further postprocessing was done except what was possible in Capture One.
In a photoshopped version I'd have softened the hair probably ...

Suggestions for a portrait novice with only 2 strobes ?
I promise I'll go buy a silver/gold coated rescue foil as reflector for the next session.


[attachment=19742:IMG_0222...ownsized.jpg]

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Women who love too much... and the men who (apparently) hate them  The good thing is the model is obviously beautiful, and no "intentional" attempt can ruin it (though you tried really hard). On the other hand, you might be onto something quite avant-garde  here, riding the wave of the latest HDTV Tylenol commercials by Johnson & Johnson (i.e., hyper-sharp facial and skin close ups).... not my cup of tea though.

[SandroD]

I like it. a bit dark, but ti has some style to it.

p.s. please compress! took ages to load on my mobile device

[AFairley]

Not my cup of tea.  There is a difference between harsh contrast and harsh lighting.  See if you can achieve the high contrast look (which I like) without accenting skin texture and facial micro-contours.  There also is too much local contrast in the skin tones not in shadow for my taste.  You can actually get a very smooth look even in high contrast portraits, which is more appealing to my eye.  For some outstanding examples, look at some of the movie studio star portraits from the 30s and 40s, I'm sorry the name of the photographer I'm thinking of escapes me right now.

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

Thank you very much everyone for your comments.

To me it was very interesting reading your thoughts and impressions about the image and some questions came to my mind (Don't forget I'm a non-pro - maybe some of this may sound trivial to you).

a.) How much information should one provide to an image to make it understandable - or should in any case an image work without any explanation?  
b.) How much does the context of presentation determine the perception of an image ? I wonder if the image might have worked in a context of an "experimental portraits" series.

The brutality of how I was treating the image was an attempt of introducing a way of dealing with beauty.
Slobodans remark hits that point pretty well, though the image doesn't work for him.
I wanted the image to represent the tension between beauty and the harsh style which would usually be more appropriate for an old man in a mountain village. Thats why I intentionally exaggerated the skin details, pores and such. Its a style which would usually probably be associated with masculinity. I also reduced the color saturation due to that as well. Leaving the color saturation would have completely destroyed it.

I couldn't tell this exactly before I was reading your remarks, I simply just had a feeling and wanted the image to go in that direction, but couldn't properly express it to myself. So - thanks for that as well.

Most likely to bring out the desired tension artistically better would require some photoshopping, maybe something in the direction of that "second layer - soft light mode" technique desribed in the recent thread here:  
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=40411


So - your remarks helped my to find out what I really wanted with that image.


But if I criticize myself I must ask myself if this desired effect is clearly enough from the image or not ?
Would the image need explanation or an appropriate context?
And:
What could I have done better to intentionally hit the nail concerning this concept of tension between beauty, facial expression, the overdone skin detail (the non-beautiful part) and the overall harsh look?


Comments / suggestions welcome.

Thank you
~Chris


P.S.: Just as an additional information: The images were taken as a first attempt. Due to lack of skill / ability to manage the light on my side (complete studio [=living room] beginner) many images had a look much too harsh. So - I tried to make the best of it and came to that concept - it was born out of an error and I tried to make something I liked out of it.

[AFairley]

Chris, I understand what you wanted to do with the skin texture, that's an artistic choice.  The problem for me is that the parts that are not in shadow are too high contrast, the highs close to pure white, way too light for B&W skin tones, IMO. Remember skin is around a zone 6 in the zone system.  The face look sort of oily to me because of that.  I would try dialing down the contrast range in the face that is not in shadow, and if you want to emphasize skin texture, do that with sharpening.  Good luck!

[blansky]

You definitely need a reflector. Get some white fomecore, cut it to 3x5 feet (somewhere in there) and hang it from a stand with wire.

Start with one light and one reflector and get that the way you want it. Then you can add in accent lights, hair lights, background light later.

If this is the quality of light you like (harsh, specular) that fine I guess, but if you wish the quality of your light to be flattering you need some sort of light modifier llike a softbox or an umbrella.

But most importantly use ONLY one light and one reflector until you learn how to light people. Broad light, short light, butterfly light, split light, etc.

google it.


Michael

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

Since I feel the need for improvement in portraiture I reprocessed two portraits I have presented here earlier.
This is one which really needed to be worked on, and though not perfect I hope the new processing, done  much later is a leap forward.

[Jeremy Roussak]

(Don't forget I'm a non-pro - maybe some of this may sound trivial to you).

a.) How much information should one provide to an image to make it understandable - or should in any case an image work without any explanation?  

I'm very much a amateur as well but in my view, a photograph should - must - work without explanation. If it needs text, it lacks something. That's not to say that explanatory text is useless; it can provide interesting background. But it shouldn't be necessary.

Since I feel the need for improvement in portraiture I reprocessed two portraits I have presented here earlier.
This is one which really needed to be worked on, and though not perfect I hope the new processing, done  much later is a leap forward.

I suspect your model would be a lot happier with the latter one, although the rather wide-open eyes seem to me to give her a somewhat manic and slightly threatening air.

Jeremy

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

Actually she was happy with the first one as well after recovering from the shock .
But she surely prefers the second one.
The second processing was important for me, because the first was a sort of compromise.
I still am not totally happy, because I feel I have fixed something in post which was a mistake during shooting,
but its all a learning process, and as a next iteration I'm much happier with the second one.

[petermfiore]

The first one is more personal and the second one is by the rules.
I like rule breaking. When it works it can be powerful.
 
Intent is everything.

www.peterfiore.com

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

The first one is more personal and the second one is by the rules.
I like rule breaking. When it works it can be powerful.
 
Intent is everything.

www.peterfiore.com

Thanks, Peter - this is the type of comment I sometimes need, when drifting towards the pitfall of technical perfectionism.
The first one was just an attempt to make something out of a file which wasn't as I wanted it,
and I tried to make something out of it - yes - mistakes can help to find something new.
Though I like the approach of using everything, even mistakes as a source of inspiration,
I must admit I still simply lack a lot of hard skills concerning portraits and many other fields of photography
(though I had some nice lucky shots) and still feel I have a long way to go where I want to be.
Time to move on and take new and better portraits ...