Home Forums Photography Showcase please be gentle

Viewing 11 posts - 16 through 26 (of 26 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #13795

    @Bill, with identical framing the dof does differ. Obviously a 50 is still a 50 but because it acts like an 80 you stand farther away the end result is a deeper dof for a crop sensor. Equivalence is the key word

    The key to understanding, from an engineering perspective, is to hold everything except one constant, and by changing that one variable, see what the difference is.  If you change sensors, and also move the sensor further from your subject, you are changing two things, or more, at the same time.   I appreciate that you might want the same framing, so will use the camera this way.  I also appreciate that you can get that much closer to your subject for a portrait if you use a full frame body and the same lens.  I agree with Bill though.  The sensor size does not affect DOF.  How you decide to use it might, but that is the usage, not physics.  If we skip portraits for a moment and look at macro, the lens will be in the same place for both sensors, and the full frame sensor will just record more space around my subject.  DOF will be identical with both sensors because focal length, aperture and distance will be constant.  The same can be said if you are using a telephoto lens to take something far away, because you cannot get closer — standing on shore and shooting a boat that is sailing for instance.

    #13801
    AndreCosto
    Member

    I like your stuff. Part street, part fashion, not quite posed, but not quite candid either. You have a striking style and the images are interesting. What more can one ask for? I am not crazy about the low contrast shot, but then I like contrasty. Keep doing what you like.

    #13802
    Bill
    Member

    Thank you CC – I was trying not to be too technical in my explanation.  I shoot with Canon’s so I do not know if the same can be said with Nikon, Pentax, Sony and the others.

    #13861
    rkerr
    Member

    thanks for the help guys will definitely keep that in mind for when shooting next. as i said im not really sure what im shooting i call it fashion beauty but its my own style so i dont really know.

     

    but i will definitely try changing my DOF and other things suggested. if you have any other suggestions let me know

    #13917
    ebi
    Member

    wow, so you guys think i go bad cop when someone disagrees? I disagree with that assessment. I think I go bad cop when people get defensive and make excuses for poor work.

    I am not a fashion photographer per se, but I spent most of my assisting career in fashion so I’ve had a lot of exposure to the world. I don’t care for it personally as a career choice, but I have a big appreciation for it.

    That said, I think your work is interesting. It’s a little Bill Cunningham at times. A little Terry Richardson at other times. However, I see some issues. First off there is no real cohesion. It looks like you are testing, so that makes sense. Most editorial fashion photographers work in stories. So the develop a concept loosely based around a theme and shoot a series of images that somehow tie in together. It’s a great way to build a body of work that shows your caliber. I’d suggest doing that next time. This is more like headshot testing. Ultimately, what I am saying is that you need to shoot more.

    Natasha is a good example of this as you have two shots of her and both are miles apart. I think you should have built uponthe concept of the first shot.

    Melanie – nice shot. cropped a little too tight, the people are a tad distracting. A little more DOF.

    Amy – good shot. probably my second favorite next to the b&w of natasha

    Gaby – not good. I don’t like the model, the light is not good. But I do like the background.

    Vanessa – not the greatest portrait – just ok.

    last Vanessa – i think you should steer away from doing selective color. You are too good for that. Lingerie shots need some work. Posing isn’t great in the second one. The stop sign is distracting. I think you should lose the logo/watermark. Boyfriend shirt shot could be way sexier. It’s a little blah as it is.

    As per the note about how your wife is getting credit. That is fine if you prefer, but if you are composing the shots and directing the model then you really are the photographer. I’ve worked with photographers where I do all the camera work but they still get all the credit.

    Anyways, I need to see more in order to get a better idea. Keep shooting!

    #14009
    rkerr
    Member

    thanks for that ebi good to see you got access to the photos in the end 🙂

    i will deff try the story idea it makes sense and would help gain feeling throughout the shoot. it is a new style for me and i am still learning the direction i want to go with it.

    thanks for your feedback i will inform everyone once i have put up some new stuff

    #14138
    rkerr
    Member

    i have put up a new set from a shoot i did two days ago. please have a look.

    http://www.robertkerr.com.au/fashion-2/alina-alexandra-2/

    #14169
    ebi
    Member

    I’m not digging the grayish sky. It blows out and it looks like you tried to put something in there. It’s a little hazy overall. I’d try flagging the flare in the lens off a touch. I love the flare coming off the arm camera right. that is very cool.

    Second one, hands need to relax a little bit. The density is better on this one, I think.

    Third one is way different than the rest. different color, tonality, etc. It kind of doesn’t fit that well. It is far more saturated than the rest. I would try to bring a little warmth into the two above. Overall, better though. I would actually suggest getting a little fill in the face. They seem very down compared to the background. At least on the first two.

    #14237
    rkerr
    Member

    thanks ebi i will try a reflector on the face next time, my asisstant did try to hold the reflector but was way too windy and kept blowing her away ahaha.

     

    so do you think its a big thing to keep the photos of a set looking the same even if the background changes eg. standing up against tree instead of an open background? i am just asking as i find it limiting in what i shoot then. would you suggest putting them as two different sets?

     

     

    #14255
    ebi
    Member

    It’s very tricky. I’m not saying that the background changing is what made the big difference. I’m all for varying backgrounds. It’s more about keeping some sort of consistency or a tie in from one image to the next. I think it’s more of an issue of treatment of the photos. You went from a very flarey image to something with a lot of contrast. It was a pretty big jump.

    Check out this story in Vogue Italia shot by Paolo Roversi. The caption at the beginning basically says that she wasn’t trying to be a sex symbol but the media made her one. She embraced it and took advantage of it. She’s wearing Dolce & Gabanna in every shot. All the photos look very different but the consistencies in light and mood all remain. That is what you should aim for.

    http://www.vogue.it/en/magazine/fashion-stories/2013/10/scarlett-johansson-by-paolo-roversi#ad-image304105

    #14264
    rkerr
    Member

    ah yes i get what you are on about kind of linking the photos into one feel!! i will try that next shoot i hope my photos arent too hard on the eyes.

     

    i think i have figured it being more due to my post processing of the photograph

Viewing 11 posts - 16 through 26 (of 26 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.