A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
First portrait attempts with the 50mmModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
12 posts
• Page 1 of 1
First portrait attempts with the 50mm
Tried out the new lens on my occassional partner in crime and I'm very pleased with the results.
Will have to pay closer attention to dof in the future though. Long time since I've used a fastish prime lens so the learning continues. If anything it is too sharp. Had to pp them with a little gaussian blur to soften them up a bit otherwise I would have got beaten up!!  Can't win sometimes.
Both 50mm, 1/60 sec, f3.2, iso 200 
Cheers, John JED
Nikon D600, D7000, D90, 70-300 D, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 105mm macro f2.8, 18-70 kit lens, 35mm f1.8 dx, sigma 10-20 dx, SB600, SB80dx, Metz 45ct4, & other stuff. Why are there no cheap hobbies?
Nice lighting John, natural light?
http://wolfeyes.com.au Tactical Torches - Tactical Flashlights Police torch rechargeable torch military torch police military HID surefire flashlight LED torch tactical torch rechargeable wolf eyes flashlight surefire torch wolf eyes tactical torchpolice torch
Thank You
Glen,
At a guess I'd say it was naturally occurring flash on top of the camera. I recall at a workshop with John Sexton some years back that someone asked what technique he used to get detail in the texture of the underside of a giant boulder. John replied that he preferred to work with 'available light' and that when he looked at his camera bag there was a Vivitar flash 'available' right in the left pocket. Cheers, _______________
Walter "Photography was not a bastard left by science on the doorstep of art, but a legitimate child of the Western pictorial tradition." - Galassi
On camera flash, Glen.
Overcast day so the room lighting was pretty dull. The pix were nice & crisp straight off the camera, a bit too good (you can see all my wrinkles  ) but a bit of pp softened it nicely.
Got it it one, Sheetshooter. Handy "available light". Cheers, John D JED
Nikon D600, D7000, D90, 70-300 D, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 105mm macro f2.8, 18-70 kit lens, 35mm f1.8 dx, sigma 10-20 dx, SB600, SB80dx, Metz 45ct4, & other stuff. Why are there no cheap hobbies?
John,
Very nice. What white balance setting were you using, and did you shoot raw or jpg? My guess is that you used auto wb, and, given that you used on-board flash, that's probably not the best setting for this type of shooting. If you look at the skin colours, you'll see that they vary across the two images. That's probably not a good thing. Also, look into the whites of the eyes, and you may see a small colour cast in the first image; that cast is not present in the second. As you were using a constant light source, the last thing you want is the colours from your subjects screwing up the wb, and thus either setting the wb to flash, or else using a preset wb, would help you achieve some consistancy in this area. If you've shot raw, this can be adjusted in NC, but it's fixed at the time of maiking the original images. Download the WB tutorial from our main page; you might find that helpful. g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
Hi JED
are you able to post a copy of the unPP'd image (or a crop of it at least)? I'd be interested to see just "how sharp" the lens was....  Dave
Nikon D7000 | 18-105 VR Lens | Nikon 50 1.8G | Sigma 70-300 APO II Super Macro | Tokina 11-16 AT-X | Nikon SB-800 | Lowepro Mini Trekker AWII Photography = Compromise
Your guess was right, Greg. Auto wb but I did shoot raw so all is not lost.
Looking at the nefs in NC, the colouring seems to be consistent in both images to my tired old eyes so I am thinking that perhaps a slight difference in the pp may account for the variation. I'm also slightly colourblind (the joys of advancing age and diabetes) so I'm happy for any guidance there. Are you still seeing a colour variation in the crops of the eyes? Thanks for the heads up on the wb tutorial, will grab that. Hi Aussie Dave, These are 100% crops of the eyes. Just cropped out of NC into PS and converted to jpg with no pp. They show that I should have stopped down further for better dof. Camera to subject distance was about a metre so f3.2 wasn't good enough. Apologies for the size, wanted you and Greg to get a decent look. 
All tips/suggestions most welcome. ps. Just previewed the post to make sure the links worked.....a bit scary having four eyes staring at you. 
Cheers, John D JED
Nikon D600, D7000, D90, 70-300 D, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 105mm macro f2.8, 18-70 kit lens, 35mm f1.8 dx, sigma 10-20 dx, SB600, SB80dx, Metz 45ct4, & other stuff. Why are there no cheap hobbies?
John, Actually, I'm Gary , but thyat's ok. Just don't call me late for lunch!
Ok, good news in that you're shooting raw, and yes, I am still seeing a very minor difference between the colours of these two images. It's quite subtle, but let's look at the model's right eye in each image; that's the eye that appears further from us in each of the images. It's slightly in shadow (relative to the other eye) and I find that colour casts such as this are easier to spot in open shadow areas such as this. I'm seeing, in eyes01, a very slight blue cast. Look closely at the white of her eye, immediately adjacent to the iris. While I'm not expecting a pure white here, I also don't expect to see the blue cast. To me the skin is also looking a little a little "jaundiced" The second image appears (to me) to be more neutral, but as I say, this is a very subtle cast. Here's my version, with just a very subtle nudge in the blue. While the eyes still don't look 100% neutral, the skin looks less jaundiced (to me)  g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
Oops.
 Sorry Gary. I'd been talking to a Greg on the phone just before I did that post and my brain musn't have rebooted properly.
I can see what you've done and agree the skin tone has improved with the touch of cooling. As you said, it is very subtle, but these subtleties can make or break an image. It's looks as though it will be a difficult balancing act (no pun intended) to get the right compromise. I've got a lot more playing to do. Thanks very much for your help. Cheers, John D JED
Nikon D600, D7000, D90, 70-300 D, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 105mm macro f2.8, 18-70 kit lens, 35mm f1.8 dx, sigma 10-20 dx, SB600, SB80dx, Metz 45ct4, & other stuff. Why are there no cheap hobbies?
John, yes, this is very subtle, but that's probably why I persisted; you were so, so, so very close, but just missing it by that much!
While it's been a long time now, I have spent a lot of hours in a colour darkroom, and produced countless colour prints. I needed to look very critically at our output and this was exactly the sort of adjustment I needed to make. I will say that it's so much easier to do on a PC than it is on a wet bench, but probably not as much fun. g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
Was playing around to fine tune the colour and decided to try a b&w version.
Pp'd it for a bit of glam and she loves it, so I've scored some brownie points 
Did some darkroom stuff at school but it wasn't really my forte so computers have been a godsend for me. 
Cheers, John JED
Nikon D600, D7000, D90, 70-300 D, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 105mm macro f2.8, 18-70 kit lens, 35mm f1.8 dx, sigma 10-20 dx, SB600, SB80dx, Metz 45ct4, & other stuff. Why are there no cheap hobbies?
Very nice, I can see why she would be impressed. If my missus actually posed for photo's then maybe I could try to win some brownie points too!!
Well done.
Previous topic • Next topic
12 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|
