Nice work, and like the post processing treatment. Perhaps a little more fill light camera right to balance detail on the left and right arms.

This is probably one of the most difficult scenes to take a panaroma of as it has so many vertical and horizonal lines in the pier that can distort easily. Moving in parallel to the pier, will change the perspective in ecah shot. Its better, I belive, to shoot from a cental point. There are two main issues 1) As you move around the central point, you are rotating around the centre of the lens which si not the same as rotating around the plane of the camera, in which the imageis captured. You need a special panaoramic head for that. 2) The camera needs to be able to capture horizonal line, and for that a tllt shift lens is needed. Think of trying to take a photo of a sky-scraper. Just by moving the camera upwards, the vertical lines would start moving off vertical. A tilt-shift lens would correct this. One tip is to shoot panaromas in portrait prespective, as when stiching together you will have more in the top and botoom of the frame to play with. In most case, e.g. landsapes none of this would really matter as the distortion is acceptaable to the eye, its just that you have chosen an artitectural building to shoot.

Hope it helps.

Shots like this are difficult because the dynamic range difference between shadow areas and higlights can either cause the highlights to blow or the shadows to contain no detail. The end result is subjective and down to creative intent. In this case if you had exposed, or compensated for the shadow area of the skin it may have given you the result that you wanted.

The Canon 350D may well suffer with noise at higher ISO's, and handling it in post is probably the best way to mange it. Noise generally is worse in shadow areas.

Another tip is to take an exposure of the shadow area and the higlights on the skin, and if there are within 2 stops differnce you can likley get away with exposing for the shadows without blowing out the highlights on the skin.

Hope it helps

Potentially a "wow" shot. Would have been nice to shoot just after sunset so that the sky was blue. The building left of frame detracts from the "armadillo". so would crop it.

This may work for better separation:

Meter the rear of the egg, with the dome pointing towards the backdrop. There should be at least a 1/2 if not a full stop difference between the light falling on the front of the egg and the rear.

Personal preference would be to have a runny yolk, perhaps with it dribbling over.

Like the hair rim light, but the face seems under exposed. There also seems to be a red colour cast on part of the face. The bottom right corner of the frame distracts. Have uploaded a mod with a slight crop, and a high-key effect that has lightened the face.

Position the model at an angle to the camera (e.g shoulders at about 45 degrees to the camera) and have her face the camera, as this will be a more flattering position. Having her square on, can make her look "fuller" that she actually is.

Image lacks sharpness and focus. May be down to a combination of handshake and being out of focus, as well as a shutter speed that is too slow to capture the action. Exposure seems slightly off too. Have uploaded a B&W mind with increased contrast, tonality and sharpness to better emphasise the combat. Also cloned out the white spot distractions on the wall.

A further sharpen after down-sizing I find is sometimes needed. Really like the expression of the model, and the soft treatment, although, agree the post softening is a slightly too much and the skin has lost much of its natural texture. The smiling eyes, and the eyes themselves make this shot for me, a relaxed natural pose. Compositionally, and its a personal taste, I would have preferred the model placed more on a third, the hand looks somewhat awkward, and covers too much of the face and mouth, and placed centrally hides the neck, so it appears that the model has a stunted neck.

However it remains a really nice shot, and I am sure if the customer were paying, they would buy. In terms of post processing, it could all be tweaked in the next version that you do.

OK. Thank you. You may find it useful to explain the lighting position (think of a 24hour clock and where each light was on the clock), the size of modifier that you used, and the angle of the lights (45 degree etc.).

Comments purely on the lighting:

The main lighting is probably harsh as its too far away, and the softbox may not have been large enough. General rule is the closer the light, the softer the light, and it should be no further away that 2.5 x the diagonal (i think). A way to judge a good lighting position is to have the catchlight appear at about 10 or 2 o'clock. In this shot position looks about right but much too central in the eye. Also be aware of the speculat high-light, in that reflectance of the white cardi is much brighter than the face. You should be able to use the modelling lights to see how the light falls. The secondary light seems a bit too bright causing blow out of some of the hair, as as both models are looking in different directions it just seems a bit odd, to me.

However still a good shot, and the "customer" is happy with it, which is what really matters.

Hope it helps, and I am sure some more experienced studio togs will offer their advice too.

Image is over-exposed. Am guessing that it was in heavy shadow, and the camera has compensated by over-exposing. Main issue is composition. Although the tree is in the centre of the frame it does not hold the main focus, and is lost against the backdrop of foliage behind. Would be worthwhile re-visiting, if you can, and try a few other perspectives.

Like the shot. Its a shame that the strap marks are visible. Positioning of the hair light, I assume, looks like its spilling over to the model back causing slight overexposure. Might have cropped the shot so that the model is more in the left of the frame, and have negative space on the right.

Fine shot. Being picky, as that is what I think you would want:

- Perhaps a little more space above the head
- Eyes slightly more central in their sockets
- Shooting down on the model, to make the nostrils flattering
- Soften the creases on the neck and cheek-bone

Probably pushing the capability of your camera/lens in this shot. You really need to be closer to the bird to show more detail. The eyes and head of the bird are barely discernible. Shot also lacks sharpness, it may be slightly out of focus, or the result of camera movement/shake. Compositionally the bird is in the centre of the frame, and would be better balanced if it were placed on a third (Rule of Thirds).

Bed stand shadow slightly distracts. Would try and reduce the highlights on the models corset. Models right hand looks like it is disconnected from the arm. Models left arm looks stiff. Butterfly on wall behind models head looks like a extension to the head. Models shoulders and pose is almost square on, making the model appear fuller in body. The blue toning seems to have lost, I assume, the union jack colours of the pillows behind.

Eye is drawn to the hair highlight camera left which is almost blown. Eyes are quite dilated, which is normal when shooting in dimly light areas, but leads to the centre of the eyes being mostly black. Lighting, camera right, could have been moved slightly higher so that the reflecting was at the 2 o'clock position (45 degree placement) which would have better light the top of the hair.

Overall though, still a very nice shot, and you have captured the sultry mood.

Midday sun is usually harsh and casts deep shadows, making the eyes appear somewhat hollow. Either a bit of fill flash or a reflector can be used to bounce light back. Nice shot. Horizon is off the horizontal.

Like the shot. The grey "bar" behind is distracting. Have uploaded a "quick and dirty" mod. Have also softened the skin

Janet, this is lovely work. I am being picky in these comments, which should not detract from the quality of your work:

- RHS of the models cheek looks almost blow out
- Light falling on models shoulder distracts
- too much whites of the eye showing.

Very much like this shot. The focal point is the hands, but it has left the models eyes in soft focus. Using a more open aperture would have put the face and eyes out of focus, thereby emphasizing the hands, or a larger aperture would have put both hands and eyes in focus.