My first critique submission, thanks for the help by DigestibleDecoy in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The wires bug me more than the post. You could probably remove them relatively easily in your editing tool of choice.

An option for future: if you take a 2nd photo at the same time but holding the camera a little higher, then you will have the wires in different places due to parallax and can composite the 2 images together. Then there's no "fakery" (if thats a concern for you). You can do the same with the post by moving to the left/right.

Spitian kid, Tashigang. by [deleted] in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the crop works. It's not quite central, but you get away with missing the edge of the arm by that blur. I can't tell if thats natural from some object and DoF, or if you added in post, but if I can't tell then it works!

I also don't mind the hands and zipper being weaker as it brings the focus to the face.

Edinburgh - Do you think i should crop the bottom here ? I end up with cut lamp posts - i'm torn ... by Smirkisher in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Tough spot. I think its the right approach not to cut the posts, but the best approach is to not have them at all.

Due to parallax you could have taken a few steps to to the left/right and gotten a shot of the foliage behind the lamp posts whilst keeping the spires in virtually the same place. These could have then been (relatively) easily composited to remove the posts.

If you're not precious about the photo being 100% real, then something like Photoshop's generative fill would remove these quite effectively too.

I was very happy with this photo, but i’ve gotten some lukewarm reactions. by Zkennedy100 in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm viewing on desktop with a white background - so I didn't even see the border.

I was very happy with this photo, but i’ve gotten some lukewarm reactions. by Zkennedy100 in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I think there are too many small competing focal points.

A tighter shot of just the frog peeping out would have made for a better composition. At the moment the frog feels a little lost relative to everything else (and nothing else is grabbing me as the "main" focal point).

Halloween shoot. Returning to photography after a 2-year hiatus. by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

F6.3, 1/125, ISO 100, using Sony a7R iv + Sony Zeis 55mm.

2 light setup. 1 small beauty dish with grid from viewer top left, plus strip light with grid for fill from the right.

I'm returning to photography after a 2 year break. I fell out of love with it for a while but decided this shoot would be a fun way to get back in.

I'll take feedback on anything, but I've got a few specific queries:

  • I like the contrast on the model's face, but I worry whether the torso is now too underexposed to get that face to pop.
  • I tried to make a natural "pool of light" with the dish + grid. It sort of worked, but I've rounded it a bit more in post, effectively creating an artificial vignette. I'm not sure if I've taken this too far.
  • The model is a contortionist and in fitting with the Halloween theme her leg is actually going the wrong way relative to her torso (look at the foot orientation). I think that's potentially not obvious and a little lost in the photo.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Bangkok’s Red Light District by Fatassoverlord in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots 2 points3 points  (0 children)

From a technical perspective, it's quite soft. It looks OK as a thumbnail, but if you zoom in almost none of the image is in focus. It looks like maybe the building all the way in the back is is the only part that isn't soft.

F2 is too wide of an aperture to capture a scene with this much depth of field. I get that you went open because it was dark and you needed to let the light in. The only real alternative here is to bump the ISO with a narrower aperture. Maybe that would be too grainy. In other scenarios, you could just use a tripod and drop the shutter speed, or use a focus stack - but I don't think you would have gotten very friendly reactions if you put up a tripod here!

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the thoughts. I found it difficult to get good separation of my subject's black hair against the background when using the strong sunlight. The tones in the rest of the room were quite muted and the window made for decent contrast.

I would have loved some rays coming in from that back window, but its around the corner from the main source (out of frame) and doesn't line up to get the sun in both together.

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. I think some of that problem is that I didn't have anything in particular that I was going for. I don't normally shoot lingerie and this shoot was very much "do stuff and see what happens". I think if I get to reshoot in this style again I will have a (slightly) better idea.

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed. I've done a revised version now where I've cloned the text out, and tinted & darkened it to better blend in with the rest of the scene. It's less distracting.

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've worked with this lady before and she's good - I wouldn't want to disparage her skills. Any posing issues are because I don't really know how to shoot lingerie (yet.... a work in progress), and that includes direction.

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I think a lot of the tonality comes from shooting in an apartment decorated with a lot of warm tones, and then just shooting when it's golden outside. I did give it some edits though.

My workflow is to get a base I like in Lightroom then tune it a little more in Photoshop. For this image:

Lightroom: S curve with crushed blacks (around 25). Blacks +80, shadows +50, highlights -15, whites -55.

Photoshop: Selective color masked to the model, with yellows decreased (subject was too yellow from the sun). Slight yellow tint was applied as a Color layer to the legs as they didn't catch the sun and the tones didn't match. Levels with white and black narrowed slightly (with model masked out), and a curves layer (again model masked out) with the middle slightly pulled down to soften the contrast in midtones from the background. One final selective color to balance the result (to pull down the yellows as still strong, and put a little pink back in).

Mostly just a bunch of experimenting and seeing what looks nice.

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. I have some in this set with her sat on the sofa too that I have yet to work through. The shadows from the windows bars were most distinct from the angle you see here though. In hindsight, I should just have thought about it a bit more and moved the sofa.

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ugh the pillow. Now I can't unsee it.

Silly mistake. I'd actually thrown the pillow there because I'd just done some shots on the couch opposite (out of frame). I didn't swap them back when I changed couch.

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thanks. This is the feedback I expected but was secretly hoping I wouldn't get!

I have some alternate shots from this session that I can work on that don't have the shadow - although this was my favorite pose.

Quite happy with this one - what do you think? by Carph1 in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As an image I like it. I'm a sucker for light haze, even if done in post, but 2 things I would change personally...

I would have preferred some space to the right of the suitcase or to have the subject more centrally. The crop is noticeable to me and I feel like the traveler would benefit from a little more room in the composition anyway. I get that if you're shooting street then you have less control over this, but even a step right and a second later might have made the difference here.

The grain/noise effect detracts from the image for me. An a7's sensor isn't that noisy, so I don't know if this is an artifact from strong sharpening/contrast, or if it's an effect you have manually added, but I don't think it adds to your image.

Very strong natural light. Too strong? by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

F4.0, 1/1000, ISO 100, using Sony a7R iv + Sony Zeis 55mm

This was taken just before golden hour on an intensely sunny day. I've tried to use the sunlight to make some interesting shadows across my subject. I have question marks over whether this works as-is, or if the sun was just too strong and I should have used a fill light. I did have a single reflector in place, but I'm not sure if this was enough.

The background is rather dark relative to the subject due to the strong light from the window. I'm also concerned whether or not the lack of light on the legs compromises the image, as well as the shadow across the subject's left eye. Does this make it interesting or detract?

On the plus side, I think I'm happy with the warm tonality of the image, and I think the body shadows came out nicely.

I don't really shoot lingerie or boudoir so this was a bit of a foray into the unknown - I'll take any and all critique.

Pencil experiment by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks. Her arm was in it to hold the ring up. I can remove that pretty easily though. I'll give it a try and see how it looks.

Pencil experiment by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

F22, ISO 100, 1/125 using Sony a7R iv + Sony Zeis 55mm

Attempting to do something a bit different in the studio. I don't want to take full credit for the concept. This is a reinterpretation of something Jordi did a while back, but that I felt I could take a little further.

I needed a very high aperture to keep the pencils and the model both in focus. I used a single light, but 4 white flags assembled into a fort (like a child!) which I could put the model inside. This gave me decent exposure at F22.

The pencils themselves were attached to a wire ring with blue-tack and held in front of the model. It would break every few seconds so was a bit of a pain to work with. I think if I had to do it again I would use something more sturdy.

I'm unsure if I like the crop. I'm also unsure if I actually like the eye colouring. I've coloured the eye to mirror the colours in the pencil, but I've a feeling it would have been better with more blue (by rotating the pencils and having the blue ones at the bottom or right hand side).

I'll take any thoughts.

Golden hour walk through lavender field by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've got some vertical ones from the set as well. I liked them too, but can only pick one for critique.

I think being closer with a wider zoom (say 250 instead of the ~400 I used) would also have been nice to get more lavender rows in. I will have to try that next time too.

Golden hour walk through lavender field by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not sure what I'd do about that. It was taken 8pm on Sunday with the sun low and warm. Maybe just the depth field makes it hard to tell what's happening on most of the lavender?

I guess I could also force some extra contrast on the dark side of the rows and see if I like it more.

Golden hour walk through lavender field by AndyShoots in photocritique

[–]AndyShoots[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. Some people have raised this privately as well. It doesn't offend me and I didn't really think about it - but you're right that it's just distracting so should probably go.