Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
inkh3art3dParticipant
A Moment in Time 4 Photography popped up on my newsfeed today. Looks like they’ve paid money for FB views. Grrrrrreat.
inkh3art3dParticipantOMG A Moment in Time 4 Photography is only one hour away from me. Hmmm. Curious. I’ve never heard of them.
inkh3art3dParticipantBill, most people do mini sessions as a marathon. Charge a set price for the time/talent + a product or two with the ability to purchase more and do this many times during a day or weekend.
Local going rate is $250 for 30 minutes + 5 digital images. Lowest I’ve seen is $45 for 30 minutes with at LEAST 30 images on a disc >.<
They can be quite lucrative if done well, especially if used in conjunction with in person sales.inkh3art3dParticipantI actually got a FB message from you “advertising” your services. Sorry I blocked you as spam, but I’m not really that sorry.
inkh3art3dParticipantI know the bride and I physically wince (as opposed to figurative wincing,) every time I see a new one in my feed.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.722656201151325.1073741850.638008832949396&type=3inkh3art3dParticipantWhen you have to qualify that “yes, their eyes really are this color in person!”
This lady is local to me. Like, as in, 5 miles down the road in the epitome of rural.
https://www.facebook.com/178162908905242/photos/a.244786682242864.71202.178162908905242/737950246259836/?type=1&theaterinkh3art3dParticipantinkh3art3dParticipantYou are a real bully, Slayer! I mean, linking us to her page on here is one thing, but you’ve taken it too far!
Her work isn’t stellar,but the majority is loads better than what we see on the front page! Yes, she needs to cull down what’s on her FB, but you have no right to post her work (yes, that’s what it is!) on Flickr.
You’ve made her put a bounty on you! it probably only bolsters your pride, though.
https://www.facebook.com/Alwaysnforeverphoto/posts/894063883956303
inkh3art3dParticipant^Have you seen her website?
It’s interesting, to say the least. At least she’s confident.inkh3art3dParticipantCC: Thanks for those resources! I will check them out! I re-upped my domain subscription today, and it should be back online in a few moments. I had forgotten to set up the auto-payment when I first got the notice a few weeks ago and the grace period ended today.
inkh3art3dParticipantTW: Thank you for the book recommendations. I will definitely be on the lookout for them. I love to read and this seems right up my alley.
I tried to get rid of the flyways in LR via the clone/heal tool. I got a lot of them, believe me, there were many more than what are in the final images, but the ones that were left I could not make disappear. I couldn’t get it to blend in properly. I’m going to have to pull them up in Photoshop to see what I can do there with the burn tool.
And you’re right, I’m not utilizing my space efficiently.
I sometimes try to fudge the catch lights, but it never looks good even if the opacity’s really low and I’ve dodged the irises to complement them. I’ll have to figure out a way to do that perfectly, but in the mean-time, I’d rather not post those experiments, lol.
inkh3art3dParticipantThank you Trainwreck! There’s no such thing as too many Q’s or C’s!
First, let me address the mono. I did hit the “black and white” button on LR. BUT, IĀ did bump up the whites and bring down the blacks, toggled the color sliders to get the grass to be a little brighter. tree trunks darker, and then changed the linear tone curve to more of an “s” shape to increase the contrast. I like the light and airy feel, but I know many who do prefer the darker toned, more traditional black and white portraiture.
I didn’t have a flash, or reflector, or even my iPhone to create catch lights. It was a pretty spur of the moment thing and I was ill prepared, which I’m kicking myself for. I’m sure you can tell we were shooting with her facing away from the sun, mainly because even though it was around 5:45 PM, the shadows the sun created were so harsh they didn’t look good with what we had in mind for the shoot and I really liked the rim lighting it provided. She’s so young and fresh faced that intense shadows wouldn’t have done her any favors.
I can see what you mean about the posing issues. It’s not so flattering to see an eye bulging out of your socket. Luckily, I can re-shoot this and I can get it right (not an excuse for it not being right the first time, however.)
I actually took one of the photos and flipped it horizontally. Is this any better for the natural movement of the eye? My first thought was that it felt refreshing, but then again, I did post this stuff for critique so maybe it’s not that much better. Here’s the altered version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/123112662@N02/14614272431/
As for focus, I believe there may be a back focusing issue with the lens, but it could most definitely me be as well. I didn’t focus-recompose with these, I had the shutter set high enough to prevent shake since I don’t have the 70-200 with IS, and then I posted myself up against a tree to make myself steadier. I was shooting at f/4 which should have kept all of her features in tight focus because I was mainly using the longest end of the lens. I honestly don’t know what happened with the focus.
inkh3art3dParticipantinkh3art3dParticipantIn the original blog post, the journalist says she found people that would ‘shop the image for $5-30. You can’t really expect the creme de la creme with that kind of budget! The experiment had great intentions, but was not executed properly.
inkh3art3dParticipantWoah, I thought that last one was pointillism!
-
AuthorPosts