dat2ra Loc: Sacramento

C&C appreciated, thanks. Lit with two Einsteins 45/45 degrees; main with 48" octo, fill with 32" octo. D850 with Nikkor 70-200mm G at 55mm. ISO 100, f/9@ 1/60. Spot metering. Subject 6 ft away.

(Download)

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Interesting subject with good eye contact.

Try this. Keep your main light at 35 or 45 degrees and the second light behind the camera rather than at 45 degrees. Move the man light laterally and up and down vertically until the catch-lights, the tiny reflections in the eyes are at the 11 or 1 o'clock position in each eye. Another indicator of better facial lighting is a kinda loop-shaped shadow from the nose projected to the opposite side of the main light direction but not intersecting with the upper lip.

There are a few other issues and the potential of adding some additional lights such as a hair-light or a kicker, however, a good start is to create better basic facial lighting. Even one light and a reflector, if handled correctly with various feathering techniques can be extremely effective and dramatic.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Very nice portrait.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

Beautifully groomed woman, and you caught her personality well. I think you have a signature style with the catch light on the left side of her eye.

dat2ra Loc: Sacramento

Thanks, azted and camera. 'Preciate the suggestions, E.L.; I did think her hair is sufficiently illuminated that a hair light was not needed. And of course, there was a Bee 400 backlight on the seamless, but that seemed obvious and not worth mentioning. BTW, the image as shown on UHH seems to be an odd color cast that doesn't appear in the original image. I didn't know how to remove it for posting.

flathead27ford Loc: Colorado, North of Greeley

That is a very nice head shot.

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

Ok, I will be the huge pain in the ass now. As a commercial image to illustrate an article about a person who is insane then this is a winner.

The absolute number one issue in any photograph that is portraiture is the eyes. The detail is in the pupils, so much so that the term pupil metrics was adopted by the Rochester Instate of Photography when Dr. Leslie Strobles was Dean. Strobles was a well known author on the diverse areas of photography. The concern has always been primarily the different dilation of the eye's pupils.

The problem with this portrait, unless of course you intend to represent the sitter as 'crazy', is that the catch light is not located properly. The catch light belongs in the upper half of the sphere of the eye(s); if not the assertion is that the sun came up before it crossed the horizon of the earth. Surprisingly this is a modern error in most portraiture under artificial illumination.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

Sorry, but I just attended WPPI and attended workshops with the best portrait photographers. The catch light in the eye is a "trademark" and they stressed that people should design their own! So there is no right or wrong anymore. The OP did a real nice job!

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

If everyone followed the "rules" set down by our predecessors in photography, there would be nothing new in photography. Instead we should have guidelines (and I'm not the first or last to say that, I've read it in numerous articles and guides) regarding how to take photos, then consider how to bend them to our own satisfaction. Sometimes we should break them and other times, shatter or totally disregard them.

Painters did that many years, even centuries, ago and opened the world's eyes to their various styles. Photography is an art form (despite what some people say or think) so why can't we photogs do omething different if we want. We may not please everybody all the time but we can please some of the people some of the time. That should be enough.

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

This not one of "The Rules", there are certain items that are imbedded in certain basic realities. Train a dog to salivate when a bell is rung in association with being feed and you have the Russian behaviorist Pavlov. What has that to do with you, you ask? Like his salivating dog, the same Pavlovian conditioning was a applied to all of us by our Mommies. Dress the baby up, put socks and shoes on the baby and Mommy and the women regard it as 'cute' but they are applying behavior modification on all the children to know they are dressed when they have their shoes on, and if no shoes, well then you are NOT DRESSES and your performance drops by about 30 percent. A gazillion studies confirm this.

That is what is called social engineering, look at Pavlov and BF Skinner. But that single small round check light in the eye is about the planet we live on. A revolving earth with a single sun and the sun does NOT come up until it passes the horizon. It is a simple as that.

So instead of fighting that simple truth one seems better served to understand how viewers respond to the void in the eye called the pupil. It is something in our anatomy that does not exist and it is controlled by apart of our body, the iris that does exist! Essentially there are two types of flash for studio use, ones where the modeling light is on or off; while the other has a modeling light that can be adjust from on to lower settings by a variable dial. These are portrait flash type flash units. To add to the confusion for use the units mostly come with 250 watt lamps and should be reset with 75 watt or 125 watt lamps so that they can be dimmed down. Why dim the lights? To allow the pupils to open. Most people respond to an open pupil regarding the subject to appear more friendly or open (again Dr. Strobles research just after WW II). There is no mystery to giving a woman (or that matter a male) 'bed room eyes' just draw down the modeling light volume and the pupils will open. It is stunning to me how few instructors , educators, and authors explain this as the essential basics 101 of portraiture.

When I work with women doing nude/erotic images I spent time explaining the basics of what I'm doing, giving them bedroom eyes and how they can be out of all their clothes but they need to have shoes on so they feel less venerable and are empowered to be more in control. Women love these explanations, but they also get excited by the huge collection of shoes that I keep in the studio, all women love shoes and playing dress up. And they all want to try the platform and really long heels that are called bad girl shoes!

flathead27ford Loc: Colorado, North of Greeley

Very interesting Timmers! If someone criticizes your nude shots, makes suggestions, or disagree, you blast them. Pot... Kettle...

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

Ok for you, but that guy Copernicus messed it all up with his silly heliocentric universe. There is just one sun and I could be wrong but every time I have been up as the sun rose over the horizon, well you know. As to this 'trademark' of catch light stuff do listen to that guy wanting to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I am afraid this thread is going south like many others in the main section. As I have stated when I started the section, as a manager, I will not tolerate harsh or insulting criticisms, protracted arguments and the kinds of hostilities that result from such activities and that all that sort of thing will be simply deleted without notice.

I offered a critique and I did not set rules or styles for anyone's images. If you refer back to my previous post my first words were positive and the next paragraph starts with "Try this...". Simply as a suggestion and the OP can take it for what it is worth and is certainly entitled to his own style and methods. Other participants are certainly entitled to off their own opinions. If the OP does not want to try my suggested treatment that is his prerogative. Personally, I have practiced professional portraiture for over half a century, I have many credentials and awards, as well as a comprehensive academic background but I am always game to try something different and see if it fits my purposes- why not? When a photographer stops learning, experimenting, listening to what other photographers and their own clients have to say their creativity tens to dry up.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with basic foundational riles and traditional methodologies-the serve as a good starting point for expansion. Personally, I find that many photographers negate the basics and although some of their work is very inventive, oftentimes there are many elements lacking.

To the OP- The hair, in your portrait is well ILLUMINATED. Perhaps this is just a matter of etymology or technical jargon but illumination goes to exposure, not aesthetically based LIGHTING. A hair light or kicker's function is not additional illumination. These lighting additions are used for the glamorization of the hair, improvement of certain specular highlights, additional dimensionality, and accentuation of certain facial features. I also mention that a great portal can be made wit one light. So, I ain't making any "rules" around here except for decorous behavior and friendly exchange of ideas and techniques.

Being a 'pain in the ass" is NOT an acceptable method of constructive criticism. I am not a big fan of main lighting coming from below the subject, except for special effects, but I don't think "misplaced" catch-lights connotes mental disease. I suppose a central catch-light in a dilated eye does make for a rather "manic" expression. Nor do a think a catch-light placement is a "trademark" or signature aspect of a photographer's work- but that's only my opinion. The catch-light placement is simply an indicator of the placement, direction, and effectiveness of the main light. Catchlights can appear in the eyes even if the main light is too high and the eyes are inadequately illuminated.

As a genal principle- if a photographer just wants accolades and "attaboy" comments om his or her work, this section ain't the section but harshness and nasty commentary and retorts are not appreciated, constructive or acceptable.

dat2ra Loc: Sacramento

Thanks, E.L. As the OP I do want serious C&C and appreciate what I have been given by E.L and others. However, I was not ready for Timmers' "insane" and "crazy" comments though, and don't share his vision as such. E.L. let's delete this post to keep it from ending up waaay south like in Antarctica.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

For what it is worth to you from an amateur, I like the photo. Your settings and lighting are meant to give a certain (known only to you and possibly the subject) mood to the photo. Thank you for posting it and to Simone for posing.

P.S. I've worked in several mental health environs and she does not look in the least "crazy" or "insane." She appears to be a beautiful lady deep in thought.