[fionaB]

another one of Paula

come on rip it to bits again please!



Fi

[Dabhand16]

The lighting looks good Fi, but the BG is too close and not smooth, but you knew that anyway, didn't you?

I'd liked to have seen all of her hands.

There is something not right with her expression. First I thought she had some problem with her eyes, but now I just think you have caught her at the wrong angle/instant. It looks a bit forced/under the influence, and I'm not sure I'm saying/describing it clearly enough.

Is that something reflecting in her hair at 1 o/c? And I'd clone the light patch on her left arm/shoulder.

[fionaB]

thanx graham, i couldnt get the background any further back cos of limited space unfortunately ......... the shoulder is part ofher dress and i was in two minds about cloning it so i decided to see what others said! lol..her hair is her hair band i think must have missed it, thanx again.

Fi

[Dave]

I posted comment in gallery re eyes not looking right Fi

[Gary Bagshawe]

If possible the use of a hair light would have really lifted this shot imh. With black hair you can go around 2 stops more light on the hair than the rest of the shot.

[sawdust]

Well Fi I wont rip it to bits (I am finding how hard studio work is) I think its a good try Maybe the hands look a bit you know like she is cradeling her bump like preganant woman would but she don't look preganant.

[sawdust]

A HA just seen your other post (out of my depth ) so she is preganant

[JMitchell]

lol sawdust!

Fi, I will go along with your request, and do not boast to be able to do it any better but....

The lighting for me is not right. It looks lit only directly from the front (or slightly to the right), creating a light patch in the middle, and a horrid dark shadow behind, whilst removing any warmth from the skin because the camera is WB-ing for the flash / light (?).
You have to light from the side for this kind of image IMO, or at least, not from straight on in front. Perhaps a higher angle or side light, with a diffuser of some kind, but I know you probably don't have all that studio kit!
Also as others have mentioned, she looks a little vexed and uncomfortable, not with you, but at the fact of being in front of the camera. You have also cut her hands off, which really doesn't help for lead-ins or just aesthetics.
Another thing, which relates sort of to the thing about the lighting, is the 'black to blue' issue. If you look, the background (which I assume is black) and her dress, have both gone a kind of blue colour due to the harsh light. This is yet another reason not to use the built in flash, and not to use a direct lighting system. I use table lamps and a tripod! They tend to have much warmer bulbs and you can often direct the heads they have on them, they just aren't as powerful as 'real' lights.
Finally, I know you said about the limited space, but you really have to have that background out of the picture (excuse the pun ), it's far too prominent, and is too crumpled and mish-mash looking to work properly. I'd have used a narrow DOF (if possible), or just tried to move somewhere else. Or, if all else failed, then blur it subtly in PS.

Sorry to be so mean, and anyone please tell me if I have gone over the top or above my 'status', but you did ask.....

[Dave Canon]

Just a couple of points. I think it needed a little lighting on her hair. The model's pose looks as if she is holding her breath waiting for you to press the trigger. Another shot immediately after this one might have caught her relaxing this stiff pose. On the other hand portrait photography (excepting professional models) is difficult and I certainly find getting the right pose from a model very challenging.

[Rob Barron]

In a scenario where you have lots of lighting equipment, this would need a light from below to light the BG alone to provide separation from the subject and a second light with a snoot attached to provide a nice rim light around the hair.

I am not sure why you chose such a dark BG when the subject was wearing black, that was always going to give you problems. I would pull back a bit, get all of her hands in (they are integral to this picture to show this is a pregnant lady, the dark dress hids the bump so without the hands you wouldn't know if she was pregnant or 'large!') and use some lighting to provide separation from the G. Being a touch further back will still give you a lovely portrait but the eyes won't be quite as strong as they are a bit too much here.

Good to see you giving this kind of shot a go Fi, never an easy situation.

Cheers,
Rob