[KarynLee]

Like the PP said, it really doesn’t matter how much you charge, and charging so little does devalue other professionals work. (Why pay someone who knows what they are doing when I can pay this person $60?)

That being said, I think you have a lot of potential. The guy on the car is good (but it looks like you airbrushed or softened, which is kind of a no-no with men!). You posing is creative, and I already am seeing you start to go out of the box with your posing. However, the edits on them are a little boring. You really need to focus on use of light, so play with those speed lights. Also, you’re a chronic under-exposer, so make sure you’re bringing that up. You’ll find that will help a lot of skin tones. Watch for blue people. And really work on nailing the photos. A lot have soft focus, and that could be from any number of things (to slow SS, to wide aperature).

Good luck!

 

[KarynLee]

My best advice.

Pay the extra $50. Then ask for the files unedited, and send them to an editing service to see if any can be salvaged.

[KarynLee]

If that’s real lens flare, then well done!

By “standard lens” what do you mean? I am guessing the 18-55 kit lens that seems to come with a lot of cameras. That would be considered wide angle.

A proper logo can be done a few ways – contact a logo designer in your area, and see if that fits your budget. If you look on etsy, there are some out of the box logos you can use that would be more professional, and they just slap your name in it in a nice font (those are usually around $75). If you’re having a custom logo made, expect to pay between $300 – $500 for a mid-range service (that’s about what I charge to do it, they almost always fall in that range, and I am considered mid-level in my area). There are cheaper, but like photography, you get what you pay for. Keep in mind, it’s an investment and a good logo is important because it’s how people remember you. It’s gotta be good.

[KarynLee]

Damn, I guess image tags don’t work. And I can’t go back and edit. You’ll have to copy and paste those! Sorry!

[KarynLee]

Okay, I hope you don’t mind, I took the liberty of doing a screen shot, and then editing step by step.

 

First, I needed to brighten the skin. I used curves for this, just a gentle curve, and masked off everything but the people. I ended up with this:
[IMG]http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/zz177/PoochedObedience/AfterCurvesBrighten_zpsa679e1e0.jpg[/IMG]

This helped skin tone a lot. I removed the red using a curves layer and by switching from RGB to just the R channel. I let it go for the whole image to pull it back. THis is what I ended up with after that step:
[IMG]http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/zz177/PoochedObedience/AfterRemoveRed_zps9bca167e.jpg[/IMG]

Then I warmed it up  using a warming filter and a curves layer where I pulled down just the blue channel slightly. I got this:
[IMG]http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/zz177/PoochedObedience/AfterWarm_zps4fcce49c.jpg[/IMG]

It fixed the tone, but brought back the red in the skin, so I did a curves layer where I brightened overall, took down the reds, and also bumped the greens (which removes Magenta). I then got this:
[IMG]http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/zz177/PoochedObedience/CurvesShift_zps56510003.jpg[/IMG]

I was pretty happy, so I then added a peach haze. I added a fill layer with the colour set to F9C4BD on SOFT LIGHT at 20%. This gave me the same matte feel as your other photos, but because it’s peach, it doesn’t affect skin tones. It also brightened it right up!
[IMG]http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/zz177/PoochedObedience/Haze_zpsdfff0c25.jpg[/IMG]

Then, I cropped. It’s not the best angle, and the couple will value the image, but it’s not one for the portfolio. 🙂
[IMG]http://i825.photobucket.com/albums/zz177/PoochedObedience/AfterCrop_zpsa64991ae.jpg[/IMG]

[KarynLee]

Alright, here I am for the critique. Please keep in mind, I am not a nature photography. I am only going to critique the ones that stand out to me as either really great and explain why they are great, or poor ones, and explain why they are poor. Make sense?

First one that caught my eye is this one.
http://www.etsy.com/listing/80569621/queen-annes-lace-neon-green-8×10-print
In a way I like it, it’s interesting, but there are some things about it you could improve. First, there are a lot of distracting elements. I’d crop out (what I think is) the pavement behind at the bottom, and also the distracting stuff out of the back. In the future, I’d have set my aperature wider, so you could catch the details at the front of the image as well which are currently blurry. Also, I’d crop more to the right – you’re sort of getting the rule of 3rd here, but not quite. If you don’t know what the rule of 3rds is, go look it up. RIGHT NOW!

This one isn’t particularly bad, but I want to make the point once and move on,
http://www.etsy.com/listing/89481836/winter-trees-snow-woodland-black-and
It’s just sticks straight up and down with very little interest. All up and down. Nothing draws your eye around the picture. When you look at a picture, generally the lightest thing is what draws the eye, and there should be a flow throughout the whole image so your brain can take it in. This is too many vertical lines, and it’s boring, and there is nothing to lead the eye. Avoid shots with no means of leading the seer through the image.
http://www.etsy.com/listing/110824533/winter-photography-white-snow-woodland
This is a better example, as the road leads the eye through the trees. Watch for the blown highlights, because you are missing detail, but you’ve nailed the rule of 3rds here.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/95474955/nature-photography-white-yellow-daisy
Selective colour? No thanks. This might have been nice in full colour.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/94369467/horse-brown-country-rustic-fall-autumn
I am not sure how much you know about horses, so if you know lots, try not to be offended (I have owned horses all my life).
This horse is clearly irritated and not engaged with you at all. The angle is closely cropped, and I can tell you used a wide angle. When shooting horses (or any animals in general) it’s a good idea to use a longer focal legnth, 85+. This is  for the same reason I told you the bride had a fat ass – on a wide angle, the closest thing to the lens is the biggest. Take some steps back, and use a longer focal legnth. If you’re father away, it all balances itself out. If the animal is looking away, it should appear relaxed and comfortable (unless it’s an action shot, obviously). If it’s looking at you, you want an alert and open expression, like ears forward and eyes focused on you. That’s my “photographing animals” Speil.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/109600846/nature-photography-blue-mint-red-flower
I like this one for many reasons, but dislike the distractions in the back. If you had shot so more of the stem was in the image, the flower was to the left or right, and there was nothing behind it, I’d buy it. As it is, it’s got distracting elements, and your eye doesn’t know where to look as there are no clearly defined leading elements.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/109600808/nature-photography-orange-red-blue
This one is neat. I really like it. You’ve not centered, the lighting is interesting, there aren’t many distracting elements. I think you were a bit heavyhanded with the fake lens flare, though.
THere is a technique to shooting STUNNING lens flare, and if you want to know, I will teach you.
This is an image of mine, and this is SOOC (Straight out of camera)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/88344367@N04/8070823182/
There is no need for fake sunflare.

THis is a really good example of the eye being led through the image.
http://www.etsy.com/listing/87732883/christmas-photography-red-holiday-snow
See how it runs from one corner to the other? That’s neat. Not all photos work that way, but this does. I would have liked to have seen more focus on something… even one specific berry, so a slightly different angle and aperature might have made this really neat. Again, I see lines in the background drawing my eye away. Avoid shooting them, or learn to photoshop that out.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/93247639/peacock-feather-peacock-photography
This is a neat angle, no distracting elements – BUT – the focus is in the wrong spot. It probably should have been on the eye of the feather, no the whisps.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/80675744/winter-photography-winter-decor-blue
I like this, except that it’s centered, and the white in the background. Therefore, I’d crop the top right corner out, almost like you did in the 3rd version, but more.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/96035674/nature-photography-pink-blue-sun
This one is neat, and breaks all the rules, but it works. Except for that damn lens flare. That is distracting, and it really takes away from this image.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/78650817/queen-annes-lace-green-black-off-white
This image is PERFECT. It’s set off to the side a  little bit, all the details are in focus, it’s intersting, the light leads to the dark and out the image, the balance is nice, is’s processed lightly and lovely. Love, Love, Love.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/106630913/yellow-flower-nature-photography-yellow
This is another really interesting piece, and I like it a lot. I’d crop out the dark at the top, which pulls the eye in the wrong direction (up) and leave the dark at the bottom, so it pulls the eye down and through. Good processing, really intersting.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/91146663/snow-heart-white-winter-8×10-print
This is a really neat find. It is centered though, so it kind of kills the interest. Also, the longer parts are cropped out on both the top and bottom, and there is extra space to the sides – I’d have shot Veritcal. I also might have removed the branches in the background, as they are distracting.

http://www.etsy.com/listing/81283781/gray-queen-annes-lace-8×10-print-nature
This is super, EXCEPT for that white patch in the background that pulls me away. I would also crop a bit of the empty space off the right. It’s close, really close.

I looked in the other galleries, and see a lot of repeats at different sizes, and nothing that really stuck out at me.

A few notes overall – if you’re selling your work, you need a proper logo and a proper watermark.
Try to plan your compositions more – make them more deliberate, and removed distracting elements before you begin.
Please stop putting in fake stars and lens flare. Accomplish it camera, or skip it.

I hope this has helped you out!

 

 

[KarynLee]

Jeepers, I am exhausted, sorry for all the spelling errors!

When I go back, I also think in the 7th, I’d like to see more detail in the white of the dress, as it’s got so much detail. Bring back those highlights.

[KarynLee]

They are solid, IMO.

I am assuming the look you’re going for is a soft matte feel, which is hard to nail without messing with colours.

I have nothing to say about the first.
The second, the top of the railing visible in the top right is highly distracting, and it’s already a very bust picture. I’d crop out any unnecessary distractions.
The 3rd you’ve really caught a moment and I love it, but the white balance is off. It’s very cool.
I like the 4, and I imagine that you can read the text on your screen, but I can’t read it from this end, and I would really like to. Also, the bright patched of green/yellow are distracting behind the paper, I’d tone those down a bit.
The 5th is good, but I would spot remove those dust specs, and crop a little differently. Dead Center makes this more boring, not more exciting.
I again like the 6th for the moment you caught. I hate how her hands are half cropped out – don’t limb chop! In an instance where you just happened to catch it (as I suspect this shot is) crop in between joints – so, crop above her wrist, etc. This gives the impression that her arm comtinues on. If you limb chop halfway through a hand or a write, it’s distracting. Also, these are cool and there is lots of magenta in the skin. Is your monitor calibrated?
7th, I like this, I would have show a little from the left side, so there was less table in the shot. At the very least, clone out the distracting elements on the table, so it’s not obviously intruding on the image.
And the 8th, this is good, I like this moment. Again, skin tones are too cool, and the mom’s hand is half in the picture. Also, the bright white in the bottom left corner draw the eye, I’d crop that out entirely.

All in all, good. Your composition and timing are good, and your camera settings semm sound. Now it’s just the little details that will take a good image to a great image!

[KarynLee]

(stupid tablet)

As i was saying. All that being said, i have some time tomorrow, I will go over your images. Do keep in mind that, while i am nationally accredited in 4 categories by the PPOC, none of those are Nature images. All my accrreds are in portraiture.

[KarynLee]

i am on a tablet, but wanted to respond with a bit tonight.

first of all, yes – we are tough, and you aint seen nothing yet. Photography is a tough business, so be prepared for this type of rejection. A lot.

With that said, never, ever, EVER let criticism discourage you from taking photos. While I do feel that you had no business charging for that wedding (any amount) it does not mean that you can’t, after practice and study, become an excellent photographer. Everyone starts somewhere.

Don’t be discouraged.

All of that beibg said, I have some time tomorrow,

[KarynLee]

Certainly. In the fall album, the lady bug is cute. It would have had more impact had it been taken at a lower level, so if you had laid down beside it. A wider aperature would have also helped. Right now, the lady bug and the leaf are clearly in focus, when the focus is really on the bug, correct? So, a different angle + wider aperature would have helped there. For example a few pictures later, the dark ref leaf with the drops are nice, and I like how the big drop is the focus. In that shot, I’d maybe crop differently, so the big drop is off to one side. You want to start there, and have your eye pulled through the rest of the picture, which the veins in the leaf do. Avoid centering your subject UNLESS the center is where the most impact is. In the case of the red leaf, I’d crop some of the grass off the bottom, and move the crop so the drop is more to the right.

In the trees that are sihlouetted on the sky after the red leaf, I would like to see the tops of the trees, so lay right down. I’d also like to see  brigher highlights in the sky.

This is where I hate selective colouring – directly after that, it’s a red/yellow leaf on a bed of black and white. The picture itself is actually really indistint, and making the leaf colour doesn’t save it at all. Not to mention, there is very little dimension in the black and white, so it’s a boring black and white with a spot of colour. This colour does not make it interesting. It’s still not a great picture. (I would go so far as to say remove it from your portoflio). It might be okay, if I could see all the colours, and see what a gorgeous pallate fall has in your area.

Next: More leaves, shot from above, no clever angles. Imagine if you had gotten lower, and shot on the side of the shadows of the drop, and shot through a drop, so you could see the other drops behind it?

I like the trees over the road, I think it leads the eye. I might have shot from the ground, so that the road really pulls you away. Watch that you’re not losing too much detail in the shadows.

The picture after – THIS is what I am talking about. I’d crop out the red in the background.

Next, fake lens flare, get rid of it. I like the way you shot on the other side of the light. If you had been higher up, then you wouldn’t have a distracting horizon in the background. This shot, with the extreme highlights around the dark sides of the sticks would make a cool BW.

Now that I am mostly though this, stop slanting your horizions, unless they are actually slanted (like mountains). Sometimes this is an appropriate angle, but not in landscape photography.

Next shot, looks really similar to a previous shot, only it’s orientation hasn’t changed. Don;t put too much similar in your portfolio, pick the better of the two, and carry on, Then you’ve got it in sepia. Pick one!

Love the branches right after.

I see you found the tilt-shift action. It’s neat, don’t over use it. The two you’ve used it on are a little over-saturated. Colour pop is fun, but make sure the colours still seem realistic.

A few pictures later, the pieces of dandilion – super cool. This is also a good one for high-contract BW.

Another picture of a road taken the same way!!

I like the one after the road EXCEPT for the fake lens flare.

Another picture of a road, that’s different this time! This is when it’s good to use an angled shot. Watch the missing details in the shadows.

Horizon at night – cool. Fake stars – not cool.

Harvest moon and the one after, cool and interesting.

THere, I tore apart a whole album!!!

A few notes overall: Good use of colour, but be careful not to oversaturate. Avoid standing like you normally do in nature shots, because that results in more snapshot looks. Standing right up and taking a picrture of leaves under you on the ground are boring. Get a professional logo and branding package (including a website) – it matters. If you can’t put a cohesive look forward, clients will skip over you to less-qualified photographers in the end. You’ve got a lot of work and practice ahead of you, but you also show some amazing potential.

This portfolio review has taken me about 10 minutes. Spend the $150 to have someone professionally evaluate your best 50 shots over the phone or in person. Lots of places do this, but I really like all the ladies at ClickinMoms. Also, join your Professional Photography standards organization (I believe in the USA it’s Professional Photographers of America, canada it’s PPOC, Professional Photographers of Canada). While at this point you won’t qualify for accredatation, you will have access to workshops, newsletters and other help that can guide you more fully along your journey. And if you’re going to be charging for your images, and Canon Rebel and kit lens just ain’t gonna cut it. It’s a good place to start, but seriously consider investing in, at least, some good glass for crisper shots. Start saving!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[KarynLee]

you get my first post! You lucky duck! My goal here is not to say whether or not you’re a photographer or not, but to provide some constructive cricisim on what I think works and what doesn’t.

The first album – I would cut out some of the detail shots. I only need to see the building once. Same with rings, dress, etc. The detail shots are nice, but in a portfolio, to show you can photograph people too, I’d make them the people the majority. Also, I am not sure the lens you used at this wedding, but I imagine it’s a wide angle. With a wide angle lens, the closest part to the lens is what looks biggest. In the shot of the couple at the altar, the woman’s mid section and upper arm fall in the middle, and are therefore magnified, and those areas on her are already quite unflattering. In a situation where a bride or groom is bigger, I’d avoid shooting from the ground up, as their ass always look HUGE. And lastly, don’t repost pictures you’ve already posted – if you have one in colour and one black & white, pick the one you like best, but not both (same goes for cropping). It tends to give the impression that you didn’t have many shots to work with.

IN the second one, the colours are for the most part lovely. Watch that some of the images are a little under exposed. In one image, the boy moves his hand, and you can see the camera blur. Try to speed up the SS. OVerall, I like this album.

Your macro album (the 3rd) is good. Some of the images lack impact, so really try to take those pictures with more of a purpose in mind. Personally, I HATE selective colour, and nothing screams “FAUXTOGRAPHER” more than that. Cut it out. Your images should stand on their own without effects. Try different angles with macro – straight on rarely gives the impact you need to make a successful macro shot. Get rid of duplicate shots edited differently.

Fireworks album is good, but I don’t consider it part of your portrait portfolio, as there are no people.

Your landscapes show a lot of potential. One I think you added lens flare, which doesn’t improve the photo, and again, I see the same photo edited twice – pick your favourite, drop the others. THe pictures of *just* the clouds lackdimension and subject matter, and I don’t like those.

Hope that helps!

[Author]

Posts