[ftmftm]

I was ask by a London model agency to do some head shots of Sam, we were going for a cover girl look. This is the first one i've done so far. I will post some more when i've done them. David

[dogdots]

I like the pose, but think the hand looks alittle pale. She is a pretty lady.

[skipper954]

Now you are talking, David. Nearly a perfect shot for a cover.

The only minor point is the hotspot below her left eyebrow.

skip

[Charlotte]

Technically it's not a bad shot David, except the pink eye shadow seems to be reflecting onto her eyeballs, giving the whites of her eyes a pink tinge.

I don't think the hand on her face works. It looks awkward, simply because it's not a natural pose that people do, unless she were to have a shocked look on her face, but even then her hand would not be so relaxed like that. There seems to be no reason for her hand to be touching her cheek in that aimless manner. Also her arm thus throws a shadow down her chest, which does nothing but accentuate the studio lighting. Sorry, doesn't work for me

If they asked you to do head shots ... well, this isn't a head shot. Magazine covers will normally have a face completely covering the cover, but the crop on this one doesn't fit the bill.

Sorry this is more neg's than pos's David, but it's my honest opinion, which I trust is what you were after

[Les Meehan]

Dave

Hands...the biggest problem when making photies of models. Here we have the classic 'sausages' look because the fingers are all straight. ALWAYS have the fingers bent into nice shapes to 'pose' the hand. Also, hands are quite big in relation to the face, as seen here, and so can dominate the shot, as here. Unless for effect, ALWAYS have the hand very side-on to camera. I usually avoid the word 'always' since it implies rules and rigidity but with model shots you are trying to portray 'beauty' (however false that may be) so rules do win most often.

The lighting is also rather 'camera club portrait night' looking. Study how front cover head shots are lit, check out the eyes to see how the lights are arranged. Although beauty lighting may simply look like 'two brollies full on', the reality is that it is a lot more subtle than that. Many years ago I shot beauty for Max Factor and L'oreal (and beauty mags) so I do have experience here.

When doing white backgrounds it is a common error to over-light the colorama (or whatever is used) which results in over-exposure and flaring around the model, as seen in this shot. Again, producing a white background requires subtlety. You don't simply blast it with light. The 'rule' is that to produce white without flaring make the background just a half-stop less than needed for maximum white (if you don't know how to do this then we need to talk about exposure control).

The lines of the arm pits are ugly! Try to minimise or avoid them as in most people they look naff. One reason why so many head shots are cropped tighter than this one.

For a cover shot, on a job that is, you need to know how the mag uses text and how it's main name is done so that you leave room where necessary on the image. This way the image is used 'full bleed' and the text is dropped in as needed. This means either placing the model slightly off centre to allow for side text or giving plenty of room around the model, especially above the head if the text doesn't go over it, to allow the graphic designer flexibility.

I know that this was a 'test' session for the model but these points need to be considered if you do a real commission.

Last point, sorry to be so blunt but hey why not, if including hands and arms PUT FOUNDATION AND POWDER ON THEM to match the face make-up! This way the colour will match.

Most other points above need to be added to these.

Regards

Les

[skipper954]

Thanks Les

I learned from your comments.

[Les Meehan]

My pleasure Skip, I know this type of subject is your field.

For those interested, I'll expand on the white background (BG) point (since I'm twiddling my thumbs at the moment anyway). Always prepare the lighting setup BEFORE the model is ready using a 'stand-in' if possible. Nothing worse for the rapport with a model than when the photographer is still messing about with the llights (obviously slight fine-tuning is usually required).

Get the lighting/exposure for the model as required, let's say you are using flash and the f/No is f/11 (note this figure).

Now for the BG lighting. If you want a perfectly even toned BG use a 'copy light' arrangement (if anyone doesn't know this let me know and I'll explain). TRICK: if you only have one light available for the BG you can make it easier to obtain even tone if you can angle the BG towards the light to simulate a frontal light rather than have the light strike the BG from either side (you don't always have to have the BG parallel to camera especially for clean white BG's!).

The exposure assessment for the white BG (I'm assuming the actual BG is white paper or equal and not a tone of grey) depends on whether you are using incident or reflected metering. Since the model needs f/11 (in this example) an INCIDENT flash reading taken at the BG with the meter pointing to the camera should read between f/11-16 (i.e. 11 1/2). This is because the white paper will usually record as two stops brighter than the incident meter 'average' tone. With reflected metering, a spot meter is perfect, you want the BG to be producing a flash reading of f/22 1/2 (22 and one half stop). This means when the camera is set to f/11, the BG will be two and one half stops lghter than 'average' grey, i.e. just about the brightest tone before burn-out.

This should produce a clean white but without over-exposure. So many people believe that simply totally over-exposing the BG is how you make it white. It does, but it also causes flare problems. With this controlled approach you will obtain far higher quality on the models features and obtain a nice edge to the figure rather than the overspill around the shoulders seen in the shot above. Incidentally, this is also how you should be doing any 'white on white' high-key shots. The key is control!

If you find that the BG isn't showing the two and one half stops difference then you need to adjust the amount of light on the BG. If you have less stops difference the BG will be darker than clean white and needs more light (note: more light NOT more lights!). If the difference is 3 or more stops than you are over-exposing the BG and thus less light is needed (or more light on the model to compensate).

For those wanting truly 'PRO' results, once the camera/background is set you should avoid unnecessary light from the BG reaching the lens by 'flagging' the lens with black card to completely eliminate flare from the BG outside the image area. In a studio this is easy (let me know if explanation required).

Hope this is useful to folk.

Cheers

Les

[Les Meehan]

BTW, anyone interested in a lighting workshop in Spain with me teaching it?

Les

[gsgary]

Nice shot, trust Skip to spot a small fault

[Dave]

Excellent advice Les ....if I didn't have a family I would be over like a shot for a course

[Les Meehan]

Dave, a question (and to all others).

Would your family want to see you improve your knowledge and hence move forward in the activity you love? Or do you think your family would rather that you never quite achieved what you really wanted? Answers from the heart please, hey why not ask the family!

This is in response to your 'conditioned' remark of "if I didn't have <a family>..." (others insert your own excuse in the brackets).

This is not me being flippant or nasty (I am also a 'Meridian Therapist' doing peak performance and motivation).

Let me know.

Regards

Les

PS Of course I'm trying to fill my courses, its really what my clients want too you know!

[skipper954]

Thanks Les

I want to learn more. Could you please explain "copy light" arrangement and flagging the lens?

Well, you did ask

skip