I think this is a fantastic idea for a shot, although your choice of exposure conflicts with the subject matter. Using a high ISO adds noise to the image, and when you are effectively photographing "noise" the two cancel each other out.

I think you would do much better to shoot at the lowest ISO available to you - I would shoot this on 25 or 50 ISO, but I understand most DSLR's only go down as far as 100, which is five stops lower than 3200, meaning that you'd need to multiply your exposure by 5: 2 minutes and 30 seconds would give you the same exposure levels, and you'd record far more detail, with much greater clarity.

You are privileged indeed to be somewhere with such minimal light pollution - make the most of it!

Would love to see another version of this at a lower ISO, so please let me know if you do it.

In terms of composition, I'd find somewhere where the ocean completes the horizon, or where the cliffs more obviously intersect it, as at the moment it is neither one or other.

I would set my white balance at 5600K if you have a kelvin preset available, otherwise I would shoot on normal daylight balancing, as the light reflected from the planets, and the light coming from the stars is the same colour temperature as our sun.

Seems like a big critique, but I genuinely think you have a really good opportunity to turn an already very good shot, into an absolutely superb shot.

Danny

Quote: Just to nit pick, I wonder if the sky needs to be a tiny bit brighter?
The sky looks a tad darker than the reflection, which technically should not be the case, and to my eye the sky does feel a tad on the heavy side.


Totally disagree with this comment. I think the blue in the sky is noticeably lighter, as it should be, and the clouds more intensely dark, as they should be. The intensity of the colours in the reflection is muted by the clarity of the water, hence why they appear darker in the sky. The reality is that they are blacker, not darker. The only really dark part is at the bottom edge, which I assumed to be vignetted slightly, in which case YES it is slightly heavy, but the bulk of the image is perfect IMHO.

Of course, it is just my opinion, and Matt's is just as valid, if not more so.

Very nice Mark. I'm not a big fan of double catch lights, and I think you could hold back the background slightly - seems a little bit hot-spotty on her right shoulder, but these are minor considerations, and frankly completely subjective, so feel free to ignore.

Danny

I think it's a really nice shot. I would have added some fill on the left just to create a little more separation from the floor (her feet start to blend in). Perhaps the alternative would have been to revolve her so that her feet rested on the lighter area?

Anyway, doesn't seem awkward to me, just not contrived which is, IMHO preferable. The arm missing doesn't really detract - it's a fairly obvious flow line behind her, so it's not as if it's been cut off.

The only minor critique I have is for the composition. I'd like to have seen either centralised in a square comp, or moved to the bottom of a portrait comp.

Nice work though.

Danny

Absolutely gorgeous Bec. My only (minor) critique is that I'd like to have seen a little more light between you and the frame. The shadow is just encroaching the outer edges.

Wonderful though.

Well done John. It was good to meet you yesterday. My only real critique is that I'm seeing split colours on the background - slightly blue on the left and slightly yellow on the right. Not quite sure how that has happened, but I'm guessing it's a post prod issue.

Danny

This for me is one of those "almost" shots. It's a nice photo and well taken, but there are a couple of things on it that really bother me.

1: The shape of her left arm looks unnatural and uncomfortable.
2: I don't think the image "flows" particularly well with the tomb stones cutting across at the halfway point.
3: Where is the focal point? Her eyes? The Rose? The flower on her right breast? The writing on the stones?...

On the plus side, the tones in the dress and skin are wonderful, and, aside from her arm, the pose is really good.

These are only minor things, and it's a really good idea, so still worthy of a vote.

Danny

It's a wonderful concept, even if the execution needs a little seeing to.

The good bits: I love the composition and the skin tones. The image speaks of protection, raw grittiness, tenderness and love.

The bits I think need work:

1: The crop is a little too tight. You clipped the elbow which I find quite distracting, and the top of the frame encroaches on the guy's head. I also think you've lost a lot by cropping out the baby's bum, and the guys arm cradling it.
2: The nappy and part of the baby's forearm are precariously close to being hotspots. The nappy is already blown out because of it's colour, and really needs some texture in it. I find my eyes drawn to the bright white, instead of to the man's eyes, which are, in my humble opinion, the focal point of this shot.
3: If the guy had just lowered the baby a touch, or if you'd got higher above them, you wouldn't have that left ear encroaching on the guy's face - almost into his right eye.

These are all very very minor details, but they make the difference between a good shot, and a great one.

Welcome to EPZ. A great start to your PF.

Danny

Quote: Yes, they are just a bit too high key, next session, that's something to sort out.

Not so. You've just under or overexposed it. I know that sounds daft, but when working in high key, the two manifest themselves in very similar ways. This is probably over, as there is a little light bleed around the edges of her hair.

Just add a little contrast Sarah, and lower the brightness.

V2 for me, because it looks bang on exposure-wise, and therefore jumps out at you. I know you've tried to hold this back to try and match it up with your template shot, but that was taken using pastel colours, and rather than allowing the light to soften it, they used a guassian blur.

Lovely shot. It's a little flat IMHO, and I'd probably whack the contrast up and use a bit of selective sharpening, but it's a really nice image all the same.

Danny

Very nice. As a rule of thumb I'd have swapped them over so that the girl was fully lit, accentuating her beauty, and the guy was in half shadow, adding to his mystery, or put an extra fill light on the left. The other alternative, wish is always a favourite, is to have a rear light aimed at the back of the subject to create a little separation from the backdrop. It would have saved the trousers...

Just a personal opinion, but aside from that I love the shot - well composed and pin sharp. Good colours too.

Danny

I like this shot but I think there's a couple of things that need seeing to..

1: The skin tones are so over exposed that you're creating hot spots. Lower the contrast or raise the gamma to try and even the tone out.

2: There is some barely discernible texture either side of the subjects head, which either needs accentuating and graduating towards high key at the top, or removing completely.

Aside from that, I'd have to agree with Andy that one of the catch lights needs removing.

It may be that the skin tones look different on your monitor. I fully recommend getting Spyder 3 Elite (£100 ish) and professional calibrating your colours and monotones so that your print reproduction matches your monitor out put.

Danny

Number 2 for me for completely the opposite reason of that above. On V1 the right side of the face looks like a hotspot, which I don't think is particularly conducive to a decent portrait, but in B&W it looks deliberate AND complimentary.

Nice shot Ian. There's a couple of things I think could improve the shot, though this is just my opinion so feel free to ignore/delete/swear at me etc..

1: The over the shoulder pose is good because it adds a little dynamic to the shot, but here it looks like her shoulder is up and obstructing her chin. I think this shot would benefit from dropping the shoulder and tilting the head up just fractionally. This would also open the eyes up.

2: I'd like to see the original, pre-processing. High key shots like this really benefit from a comparative state because you've clearly worked very hard on the processing to achieve the bleached look.

Nicely composed though - much prefer portraits that are offset. It also looks like you caught her in this move, rather than posing her, which is good IMHO.

I really like the idea of this image, although I think you've done waaaaay too much post production on it.

1: A photo like this would really benefit from having a solid identifiable focul point - something really crisp and pin sharp that draws the eye inwards. I would probably done as you have and used the ripped photo as a starting point, but I'd have opened up further on the aperture to give less depth of field. This would really help to create a three-dimensional feel. At the moment the image is quite "flat".

2: The noise and speckle of the shot is total overkill. I think a high ISO number will give this decent texture alone - a good fast film grain is plenty.

3: I would also slightly desaturate the shot to try and create the tone that you are aiming for - the whole image speaks volumes on mood and emotion which can only be enhanced by clever creativity in PS.

4: The lighting, whilst effective, could be greatly improved to enhance the mood of this portrait. I would probably use a softbox or diffuser brolly to one side to create more shadow and depth cross your face, reflecting the light on to both halves of the photo in order to keep it enhanced. If you don't have access to studio lighting, why not stand side-on next to a full length window and expose for the skin tones where the shadows creep in? I think this would really help the image.

Good points:

a: The composition is wonderful. It is well thought out and as good as anyone could make it. I would perhaps think about holding the photo further away from you body to give it better distinction from yourself, which will also help reduce the depth of field.

b: Photo ideas like this are the crux of really good photography. My criticisms are only about the technical aspects of producing such shots, but you should be hugely encouraged for even thinking of this.

I'm very impressed - keep it up!

Danny

I think this is generally a nice shot that could easily be improved with a few minor points.

1: For me the depth of field is not conducive to a good composition. In order to make those two particular flowers to stand out you need greater seperation from the fore and backgrounds. I'd recommend that you open right up and blow everything completely out of focus beyond the stamen, or reselect the two primary flowers and then add a heavy blur to the background layer.

2: Because you haven't entirely desaturated the rest of the shot, this actually looks like a photo of two different coloured flowers in a bunch, as opposed to a bunch of identical flowers, with one highlighted and enriched in it's natural hue, whilst the rest have been desaturated to obtain seperation. You're right, the slight saturation does give it a natural feel, but I think it prevents you achieving the ultimate result you set out to get.

3: From a composition perspective i would have shot from slightly lower, to try and remove any flowers from the background altogether, as I think the main subject would work far better against a dark, neutral backdrop. As it is the main focus of this shot is obscured by the cluttered nature of the rest of the composition.

A nice idea though, and certainly not one for the bin, but i think it could be improved upon.

DJ