Back Modifications (4)
Views 368 Unique 153 Award Shortlist   

A Side View.

By fynephotography  
Taken during a Low-Key set up at pavilian studio.

Tags: Studio lighting Low key Alexandra Portraits and people

Save & earn with MPB; trade-in and buy pre-loved


clicknimagine Plus
13 1.1k 105 India
6 Feb 2021 5:07PM
It is a good shot i don't think it needs a critic, it is a simple studio shot, it has every basic element and light but if you want to uplift the image from a standard one to an extraordinary you have to be creative and you have to go against the flow...

Use the light creatively that can enhance the drama, look out for various images, it will give an idea for sure...
6 Feb 2021 5:13PM
I think the light works well....she has a kind of tough look on her face...and body language...her hands in her pockets. Was that the intention?

chase Plus
17 2.5k 669 England
6 Feb 2021 5:25PM
Hi Archie and welcome to the Critique Gallery.
I see you have some really nice images of this young Lady in your pf, some of which have received site awards.

Did you intend loading this image for specific critique ?
If so then we could do with a little more information from you as requested in the PM you would have had on upload.

Is there anything in particular you would like us to offer critique on ?
What do you think of this image ?

Without further info, as I see this............
I like the pose and lighting.
Her face is very soft and it looks like your focus point is on her shirt rather than her eyes or even on the eye closest to us.
The bg is clean and complimentary to her clothing.
Nice separation from the bg.

We really could do with a bit more info.
banehawi Plus
18 2.9k 4336 Canada
6 Feb 2021 5:52PM
Hi Archie.

File size here is only 66kb, - tiny, so were not seeing it at is best, and it looks very soft because of this. Can you upload a larger file size, - you dont have a limit. You can do it here by clicking Modifications, then upload, and pick the large file.


dudler Plus
19 2.0k 1974 England
6 Feb 2021 9:31PM
Welcome to the Critique Gallery, Archie.

To my eyes, this is markedly less sharp than your other pictures of this lady (who looks familiar, but whose name I don't recall). With the same EXIF data as previous images, I assume that there's a focus issue...

A couple of general thoughts... The lighting is low key, but the image is heading towards the mainstream: a lot of midtones in there. My taste tends towards the extreme, but the classic definition is that it involves mostly dark tones, with a few very small bright areas.

I have a slight quibble with the angle of the model's hips and the way that the T-shirt is hanging, making her look as though she's a heftier build than her shoulders suggest (and than I've seen in your other images). Clearly it's not intentional, but a more sideways view of the hips, and the shirt falling closer to her stomach would probably look better.

Beautifully lit, and a stunning model - how had you set the light(s)? Did the same light illuminate both model and background, or were there two or more flash units involved?
Robert51 14 11 133 United Kingdom
7 Feb 2021 8:39AM
Great shot and I think you can see problems.

I have tried to give a different take on the image.
I have darkened the image with a radial gradient filter. Added a backlight to clearly see the shape of her face and draw the eye. A little colour work. Last a little sharpening and noise reduction. This would be better on working on a larger image as your working on the limit.

I hope you like it and gives you some ideas...
mrswoolybill Plus
16 3.6k 2573 United Kingdom
7 Feb 2021 12:38PM
Hi Archie, welcome from me. I hope that you intended to tick for critique, and that you will come back with a larger version of the file. What we have here is puzzling - a reasonable pixel size (866 x 1300), which is showing up for me as saved at top quality level, and yet the file is tiny, less than 70Kb. That isn't doing it any favours.

I really like the pose and expression, and that thumb. I have one suggestion, which doesn't specifically depend on image quality - I am generally uneasy with a vertical subject in a portrait frame. The phrase pencil balanced on its end in a pencil tin comes to mind... A vertical needs a horizontal for equilibrium... So I have added a modification simply with added negative space, it balances better for me. It's fairly crudely done, just to give the idea.

I also dodged the eyes very gently and added a bit of local sharpening to the face - but I suspect that the softness there is down to the low image quality.

Looking forward to hearing more from you.
pablophotographer 11 2.1k 432
8 Feb 2021 2:50AM

I like your portrait. And if I am not mistaken it carries its message in a suttle, covert way. That is my explanation of the reason why the eye is not being the best focused area in the picture.
And yes I see some substantial sharpness somewhere. Ambiguity is grey. Or may be not.

Judging the from colour strength of both sides of the background I say you have used two lights. Very well done.

Would I try a black and white conversation? I would have done it if her hair was either grey of white. Of course there are programs you can chabge the hair colour without requesting that from your model.

Nine out of Ten.
chase Plus
17 2.5k 669 England
8 Feb 2021 6:28PM
Thanks for uploading an uncropped version Archie.

However, I see this as still a small file, 66 kb only, 866px X 1300px which are the same dimensions as your original upload.
Perhaps it has something to do with the compression you are using, don't know as I am not that technically minded.

It would be great if you could join in the conversation here, maybe there is a problem with file size that we could help with or perhaps get the Tech Team to have a look at for you.
Without knowing what you have done to this image before upload to render it so small it's difficult to offer advice.
banehawi Plus
18 2.9k 4336 Canada
8 Feb 2021 7:59PM
Archie, when we refer to large size, we are referring to the file size. Its possible you dont have a large file at all if you originally shot this at a low JPEG quality. If you have shot it as a RAW file and converted to JPEG, that file size would be close to 24Mb, a larger Jpeg a little smaller, and what we have here are the first one at 66Kb and the second one even smaller at 62Kb.

IF you have a large file there, meaning well over 66kB, you can upload it without any re-sizing. Remember also, when saving any JPEG that it gets compressed smaller every single time you save it; its like making a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy on a photocopier, the result degrades each time.

Also, if you convert from a RAW file to a Jpeg, you MUST ensure the quality option or slider is set to 100%, or whatever the max is for your programme. Never ever save for web as an example, it makes very small files.

mrswoolybill Plus
16 3.6k 2573 United Kingdom
9 Feb 2021 8:05AM
As above - the 'full size' image is still just 62Kb. Looking back in the Gallery, images resized to this pixel size typically come out at 700Kb plus. Unless you intended the very low quality level, I suggest that you check your files, make sure that you do have a high quality file for the original and for the worked copy, and keep them well separated from any low quality copies. Something looks to have gone awry...
paulbroad 15 131 1294 United Kingdom
14 Feb 2021 10:52AM
The lack of sharpness may be compression, but regardless of all comments, you MUST get the face sharp in such images. This is unsharp - not diffused - unsharp. Were you hand holding? I always used a tripod in the studio unless using flash, but even then, usually a tripod. How were you focusing. Best for studio work with tripod and manual focused. If auto, the focus needs to be a small point correctly placed.

There are two basics. Correct exposure, as here, and get the subject sharp. I am a Fuji user. The X-T2 would handle ISO 800 with no problems.


Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.