Hi lee
The title says 'pondering' but I've never seen anyone 'ponder' like that, well only on cartoons.
The way the eyes are suggest to me that he is looking at somthing.
It's not a flattering pose, but then I'm not sure what you wanted.
The light is harsh and contrasty and rather over lit.
You would have added much more interest by careful use of light and shade.
He's a geezer, therefore you have to work much harder to attract people's interest. You have just learnt a basic principal of photography....girls are more photogenic

Hi Lee ,
best I've seen from you so far.
Very good. If I was to be picky, the stray hairs bug me a little, and i'm finding the image a bit cluttered with pircings and spikes. But that's just me.
Great lighting, pov, attitude, composition.
Martin

HI Lee
lots to like here, i'm sure parents would be pleased.
A few things strike me. You have gone for arty side lighting. It shows up every bump and contour, is this what you want in a baby shot? ( it might well be)
I think you have cropped the picture a bit tight, it would be better if he had a bit more room to breathe.
The bright spot on his nose I find really distracting, I would clone this out.
Funny shirt, intentional?
Martin

Hi Lee
Its better to have light from high and to the side, then fill in with reflector on the dark side.
So, side to side rather than top to bottom. Try some shots without a reflector from the side.
Remember you will probably get some reflected light from the walls of the room, unless you have blacked out the sides as well as the background. When you understand one light, then introduce a reflector.
'The quality is fantastic' so it should be with your camera and lens
One thing you have really improved over your previous shots of this girl, she looks relaxed and like she's having fun. That's a huge step forward.

I much perfer the compostition of this one. You have got rid of lots of distraction which adds lots more impact to the photo.
I still don't like the one eye, as it still looks accidential. I still dont like the fingers, you are forcing me to look and bitten and dirty nails. I still don't like the grey eyes.
You could have chopped more of the head off and got the eyes properly on a I/3.
As a beginner the rule of thirds should guide you.
I agree about the flakey skin under the nose, its a temporay thing ( unlike say a mole or scar) so I would have cloned this out.
For your next portrait, get the eyes right, the rest will look after itself.

Hi Lee
The hair looks good, the hair I like. Very well lit like a shampoo advert.
What strikes me about this photo is hair and hands, with tiny bit of face.
For me a portrait is about the face first and foremost. (Enviromnetal portraits are another matter.)
This girl's face is a very small part of this picture, generally it should be the dominaint part.
One eyed photos can look great, but this one just looks accidental rather than considered.
The eyes look lack lustre because they are pretty much in shadow, the whites look grey.
Also the eyes are not on a third, what did I tell you! Don't break the rules until you have mastered them.
If you insist on this fingers on face pose, you should tone them down a bit, they are way too bright and therfore distracting.
Pretty face, why are you making it hard for your self introducing fingers and too much hair? Less is more.

Getting good natural poses comes with experimentation and experience.
I did a shoot on Sunday the first for months, and I felt really rusty in terms of poses and lighting set ups. Theres no subsitute for doing lots of work, until it feels natural.

Re the spots, I always clone out anything that is temporary like a spot.
In this case, I would have taken out all of those blemishes on her chest/neck even if they are permanant because there are none on her face visible because of the make up, so it seems natural to match chest/neck to face.

I never take out frekles, and generally work on the principal that if ive done any ps work you shouldnt be aware of it.

Hi Lee, you seem to have the lighting of the background sorted, unless you are cheating in ps?!
It strikes me she was wearing an awful lot of foundation, but if she was, she was.
The next thing that strikes me, is what an awkward looking pose, it looks like she has a stiff neck.
You mention the spot healing brush being used, but I can see loads of spots on her chest and neck, did you notice these?
The shot is nicely exposed and sharp.
As a casual viewer it doesnt really hold the interest, and I doubt she would like it as its not very flattering.
I appreciate you are learning and would encourage you to keep on taking and taking, and develop your eye.
I would start with a one light/ black background and keep moving that light, untill you get a feel for light and shade, and what makes a portrait have that x factor that will hold anybodys interest, not just the sitters.

Hello Johnny
long time, no you throwing insults at me.
I've read all the previous posts, so far so good.
But I'm sure you will apprecaite an honest and frank critque.
You say you have captured a 'moment', well yes in so much a photo by its very nature is a 'moment'. You say you have caught an expression, well she's laughing. Yes it is quite charming, someone has said something funny, even the registar is laughing, and I like the way the groom is looking at the bride, with more of a wry smile, maybe the jokes on him?
( that's a rehtorical question)
So thats the good bit...

Shooting into the light, always tricky, the glare coming off the grooms head is a shame, and the bright burnt out window is distracting, but maybe just about within the realms of acceptability, I geuss if you really like the picture.

But what really lets this photo down, and for me would send it straight to recycle bin, along with with all my other heroic failures, is that you have used your zoom at the wide end, and this has caused all sorts of problems.

Firstly way too much floor, unless you work for 'floors r us' this is just not interesting. The focus of the picture should be the happy couple. Have you heard of the expression 'fill the frame'
it doesnt mean fill it with premium timber.

But even worse than this is what you have done to the newly weds. Look at the grooms legs!
He looks like he standing in one of those mirrors at a fairground, that gives you short little legs and a really long body. So much distortion.

The book case looks like its about to fall over, and the poor guy on the right looks like Van Gogh. I'm not sure a disembodied foot adds anything either.

On your camera you should try and steer clear of anything less than 85 mm as if you do , hello big foreheads, big noses, big arse. Brides generally want to look good on their big day.

I hope you will accept this crit in the sprit it was given. Deep breathes and relax.....

HI Lee
The white background is well lit, they all look very happy and relaxed and all are making great eye contact.
The only problems I can see are, three of them ( only the guy at the back is unscathed, just) have skin patches which are over exposed. You need to be careful to control the highlights. I think all three could be rescued with some judious cloning in photoshop. I would never let a picture go out like that with sweaty skin.
If I was the guy at the back I would be very unhappy, because he is further back than the other guy, he looks weedy in comparison. This is exsasabted by the fact that he apprears to be trying to 'get into the photo' . Half his face shouldnt be covered up, unless it was intentional like in a 'lifestyle' shot.
martin

HI Lee
Good use of white background, which can be difficult to get right, too little light it looks grey, too much and you can get glare.
I am wondering if you used the lens at the wide end, because her face looks a little distorted.
She could do with a sharpen, especially the eyes. Easily done.
A nice happy smiley picture, great for grandma, but will not hold the attention long for the casual viewer. Think how you can add some drama, the pose, expression or the POV. (point of view)
If you look way back into my P/f you will see the same girl....My first ever studio shoot.

Hi Lee
Ok you have the lighting sorted out, i like the use of a hairlight. If i'm being picky, there are a couple of 'hot spots ' on her nose, and under her eye, and on her shoulder. You could calm these down in ps. or next time be aware of oily patches that reflect light, a bit of powder on her nose may have helped, or just used a little less light. Anyway on the whole very good.
Once you have the techincal side of the lighting sorted, then you can start to think how to use it creatively. This picture is fine, but it lacks drama, emotion , a narritive. You need to start thinking about what you are trying to say, acheve, to take your photohraphy to another level.
Remember its often what you don't light that makes an interesting picture.
Martin

Hi Lee
Good portrait, sharp and perfectly exposed, good use of defused background. Nice catchlights.
Suggestions for improvement.
I'm not keen on the white salts on the wall, being white they draw your eye, and their is a big dollop right by his ear. Look for a clean background, you could maybe tone it down, or clone it out.
Your eye tends to start left and look right like reading a book.
So you start with him and you look right but it leads nowhere. If you want to include a lot of wall, it would probaly work better with him to the right, so your eye is lead along the wall to his face. The wall then acts a lead-in. As always I am speaking generally about 'rules' the best pictures often break them.
The writing on the t shirt, either include it so we can read it, or dont have it at all. the cut writing is messy.
Like your other portrait, the pose/smile looks a bit forced and self concsious. Very important to get your subject to relax, keep talking and encouraging.
Martin

Quote: I tried to follow the rule of thirds

Well you didn't do a very good job.

As a general rule ( there are always exceptions) you wont go far wrong if you put the eyes on a third.
In portraiture its the eyes that are the most important element, for me everything else comes secondary.

HI Lee
a nice portrait, sharp, well exposed, and good eye contact.
Also nicely diffused background and lovely soft lighting with hardly a shadow in sight.
Suggestions for improvement.
There are no catchlights in the eyes, and not much light. A reflector would have helped give the lighting a bit of punch, or maybe you could have used some fill in flash. Catchlights really give the eyes a lift. As they are I can hardly tell what colour they are.
I think i would clone out the green thing on the right, which is a little distracting.
I'm not sure what the purpose of the shot was for. I suspect it was a family portrait. This being the case (apoligises if it wasnt) I think she looks a little serious, with fixed mona lisa type smile. I would have gone for a lighter expression/ smile. For this it is important to relax your sitter, make them laugh!. Maybe take the picture when they are not expecting it.
I think the composition is a little weak.
You have gone for a square crop, but left the right hand side empty. I geuss its personal perference, but I find this is unbalancing the shot. I generally like negative space, but I think it works better in a landscape format. I think because a square is a regular shape, it lends itself to regular compostion. If you post another portrait, let me have a mod.
Martin

HI Andrew,
I'm looking at this picture as a stand alone, although looking at your p/f it may make more sense as part of a series, 'Hannah in a white dress in lots of different locations'
The problem I have with this shot is that it seems to be missing a narrative. Without this I can only look at it aesthetically, and my honest opinion- it hasn't got much going for it.
I'm not sure what the purpose of this shot is, she is a pretty girl, skin and hair, pose of hand behind head and halter neck suggesting glamour. But that's where it stops- Dress like a tent, scruffy chair, scruffy floor. So for me it fails on the glamour, and it certainly isn't a fashion shot, or a character shot ,or a deep and meaningful portrait. Looking at the photo, I have no idea what you are getting at. I can imagine the girl asking ' why am I'm doing this?' , I wonder what your answer would be?
Without that narrative or point, there is not much to hold the interest. The background has lots of distractions, the tatty floor, the shape of the floor given by your POV, the black bit on the floor in an otherwise 'white ' shot, the many vertical and horizontal lines.
I hate the way the dress is wrapped around her leg so that it spoils a nicely turned ankle.I hate the dirty arm of the chair.
I've done a mod which addresses most of these points I have mentioned.
Martin

Nice one Cole. He looks like he means it.
My only crit would be that the guy is the subject of the picture, he is the story, so why does it need that distracting building in the background, I think this shot would have more impact without it.
Martin

I really like the way this shot looks so different to the last one. The last one he looked friendly and approachable, this one like he wouldn't suffer fools gladly. And that's all down to you.
I like the pose and the newspaper prop, well thought out.
Some small things that strike me. On my monitor I've lost his arm, so a hand appears with no arm. If it were mine I would go into shadow/highlight, bring up the shadows until you can just see the arm/suit, make a black mask, and paint the arm back in.
The composition strikes me as a bit 'long', bringing back the arm might help this. His face is just a tad bright again.
You could do with a little space above his head.
I know you were only practising, but if this was for real, I would worry about that ill fitting shirt. I think you are duty bound to point out something like that to the client, put diplomatic hat on.

Think of a CEO shot, you think conservative and sober. I would think that's the shot you must get in the bag first. Then when you are confident you have that and if there is any time left, then you try something a bit arty and with more fun or character.
As this one stands, why did you use such a wide lens? Were you looking for distortion? I would have thought that's a no no for a business shot.
I'm not enjoying the big arm, but I really like the pose and the expression and the contrastry light ( ok you should probably tone down the right a little). You have given the subject personality which I really like. A business shot?.... Risky.

HI Geraint
Good shot, I much prefer the higher contrast mono version.
There are only two things which spoil it for me. The pearls I'm finding distracting, they complicate a simple image. I'm visualizing this shot without them and in my mind it's much better. A case of less is more.
The other thing is that the crop on the left, looks a bit messy and unconsidered. That arm and hand coming into the picture from the left looks a bit clumsy and awkward. I don't like the look of the hand much either, in that position it looks bony and rather unfeminine, especially contrasted with the rest of the shot which is very sensuous.
Martin