Out of My Comfort Zone - No Flash: I hired on of my previous years' high school seniors to model for me as I tried out lenses and different lighting. I always use my Nikkor 70-200 and...

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

I hired on of my previous years' high school seniors to model for me as I tried out lenses and different lighting.

I always use my Nikkor 70-200 and Off-Camera Flash. I know how it all works and have had a lot of success with that combination. But I wanted to try a session in which I used none of that, so I use only the Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art and only natural light.

While I like what I did, I did miss being able to place light just where I want it to get more dimension to the face. These are nice, and with her face nothing will look bad, But I still like off-camera flash as several of these are a bit flat for my liking.

Any comment/critique is certainly welcome. I don't HAVE to agree with you. :-)

Every one of these was at f/1.4

wayne-03 Loc: Minnesota

Very nice

gym Loc: Athens, Georgia

I like these. The only one that seems to be a bit flat is the second one. But the pose is very nice. THAT one could have used some additional light. The others are really good. But then, like you said..... with a face like that....:>)

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

gym wrote:

I like these. The only one that seems to be a bit flat is the second one. But the pose is very nice. THAT one could have used some additional light. The others are really good. But then, like you said..... with a face like that....:>)

Yep - thanks. Looking at it now, #2 could have used either the column or a black fill card to take light away from the camera-right side. That would have given the light more direction - from the left. Things I learned.

Gitchigumi Loc: Wake Forest, NC

I like them all, but agree on #2 needing some work.

Personally, I've not done any portrait work, but am interested in trying it. So, I am interested in the camera (FX vs DX) and which lens for each photo? I have a DX (Nikon D7100) and a 50mm f1.4, along with a 18-200 zoom. I am thinking the 50 would be a good portrait lens due to the crop factor of the DX sensor. Would you agree?

Toby

CaptainC wrote:

I hired on of my previous years' high school senio... (show quote)

Photos are outstanding although I agree with you about getting more depth in the face. I would be happy with these anytime, however.

gemlenz Loc: Gilbert Arizona

nice set

CaptainC wrote:

I hired on of my previous years' high school senio... (show quote)

:thumbup:

thively61 Loc: Robinson, Texas

Nice photos.
The second one and the last one stand out to me, but all good.

hlmichel Loc: New Hope, Minnesota

Personally, I love these. The one full-body shot is my favorite.

StrangerHart Loc: Whitetop, VA

wayne-03 wrote:

Very nice

I really like these. Maybe because I prefer natural light(mainly because it is there). Everything has it's challenges and rewards, but I frequently shoot in somewhat remote locations and managing too much equipment can get to be downright overwhelming. Hence I've become a disciple of "less is more."

jdubu Loc: San Jose, CA

Funny how the progression here is from off camera flash to natural light portraiture, instead of vice versa.

I suppose it just forces you to slow your set up process and posing to the available light rather than placing the light to your setup.

The amazing thing to me is the focus and 1.4 performance of your lenses. I assume you are tripod mounted... can't see any discernible difference between 50mm and 85mm on her facial features.

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

jdubu wrote:

Funny how the progression here is from off camera flash to natural light portraiture, instead of vice versa.

I suppose it just forces you to slow your set up process and posing to the available light rather than placing the light to your setup.

The amazing thing to me is the focus and 1.4 performance of your lenses. I assume you are tripod mounted... can't see any discernible difference between 50mm and 85mm on her facial features.

Oh yeah -that is the other thing - I alway shoot from a tripod but decided I would go all-out and ditch the lights, the go-to lens, and the tripod. So these were all hand-held.

So I just finished up a session about two hours ago and used my usual 70-200,off-camera flash, and just used the tripod in the studio - outdoor stuff was hand-held. I have to say, the images with the off-camera flash are superior to natural light. Hands down, no contest - flash wins.

greg vescuso Loc: Ozark,Mo.

CaptainC wrote:

Yep - thanks. Looking at it now, #2 could have used either the column or a black fill card to take light away from the camera-right side. That would have given the light more direction - from the left. Things I learned.

These all look great.
I didn't think about subtracting light when using a lens at f/1.4 using a column or other natural object is a good way to show some shadows. Now you got me thinking about shooting wide open and using natural objects to give shadows.

waltchilds Loc: Central Florida

These are all very nice, especially with natural light. My favorites are the first and last one. Well done.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

Wow, Cliff. I never have the guts to shoot wide open. My eyes aren't what they used to be, and I'm afraid to go back to the downloads and find that they are all too soft. You now have me thinking about stretching my boundaries again...

I think I agree on the second and third image about being kind of flat light, but on her face??? Anything would work. She's beautiful. You have very good shadows and modeling in most of the other shots. As a matter of fact, I would be very hard pressed to know that you didn't use flash unless you told me that it was natural light.