d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > Graphic Design > Photography > Finally, A New Set
Prev123Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Views: 637Replies: 21Track Topic
Member
Posts: 28,500
Joined: Jun 26 2006
Gold: 9,163.90
Trader: Trusted
#11
Feb 28 2012 05:42am
1 and 5.

rest is so far away from what you usally show us.
Member
Posts: 16,893
Joined: Aug 25 2005
Gold: 8,601.26
#12
Feb 28 2012 10:41am
Quote (RoOkieTeRra @ Feb 28 2012 07:01am)
oh and yes, I really do need a larger softbox. I actually wanted a large octabox for ages, but I´m abit broke at the moment :S


Have you ever looked into fotodiox boxes? They make some good quality softbox for very very low prices.
Member
Posts: 2,932
Joined: May 30 2009
Gold: 0.00
#13
Feb 28 2012 10:41am
I have a photo from long ago that isn't very great but it has a dark shadow look and split lighting to emphasize the mood and yet I got catchlights in both her eyes. honestly if you had captured catchlights I would really like those photos. since you didn't I'm not very happy with them :( I'm only talking about the two with dark eyes... they can be dark but with catchlights
Member
Posts: 32,538
Joined: Dec 6 2007
Gold: 1,945.00
#14
Feb 28 2012 11:28am
Quote (nikon @ Feb 28 2012 05:42am)
1 and 5.

rest is so far away from what you usally show us.


Those are my favorites as well. I like the perspective on them a lot.
Member
Posts: 14,659
Joined: Jan 27 2007
Gold: 78.16
#15
Feb 29 2012 01:41am
Quote (RoOkieTeRra @ Feb 28 2012 08:59pm)
I get your point, but I simply dont like the idea of "shooting for the post production" how you call it. Sure, if you are going for a look that can only be created during the post production, you should prepare the photo for it in the shooting process. But you are implying that post production is more important than the actual photographing, and that´s something I´m not really willing to adapt to. Maybe I need to overthink my attitude towards digital photography in general, but at the moment, I´m much rather trying to get away from the excessive post processing instead of getting closer to it. I guess it´s the market that asks for this attitude..... I´m not sure yet if I want to accept that or not.


But anyways, what exactly would be the difference in a post created shadow on the eye, compared to a natural shadow?! Maybe I missunderstood you, but werent you saying I should fill the eyes with light, so that I can make them dark again in the post?


But that's the industry mate and that's how the digital workflow works. If you ever want to do a magazine / ad campaign / editorial type shoot then rarely do you even have a choice in what happens once they leave your camera or what happens incamera.

You need to embrace digital retouching. It's not about changing your photo. And I'm not talking about retouching to the point of doll looking women, not at all. It's developing a concept before your shoot and utilizing the digital canvas to complete your concept and work for you. Whenever I do retouching jobs for people I always say "shoot for me, not what's on the back of the camera".

There's a difference between making something dark in camera and dark in post. Dark in camera means irretrievable information. Dark in post means it's always there, you just need to get it. You can achieve what you want with the right light/cutters/reflectors but it can be complicated to setup and expensive.

Sorry for the wall of text, just trying to help you here :hug:

This post was edited by lithfkn on Feb 29 2012 01:44am
Member
Posts: 2,819
Joined: Oct 30 2010
Gold: 1,100.85
#16
Feb 29 2012 08:36am
ty nick and i like last photo.
Member
Posts: 15,250
Joined: Jan 24 2007
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 20%
#17
Feb 29 2012 08:49am
Quote (lithfkn @ Feb 29 2012 09:41am)
But that's the industry mate and that's how the digital workflow works. If you ever want to do a magazine / ad campaign / editorial type shoot then rarely do you even have a choice in what happens once they leave your camera or what happens incamera.

You need to embrace digital retouching. It's not about changing your photo. And I'm not talking about retouching to the point of doll looking women, not at all. It's developing a concept before your shoot and utilizing the digital canvas to complete your concept and work for you. Whenever I do retouching jobs for people I always say "shoot for me, not what's on the back of the camera".

There's a difference between making something dark in camera and dark in post. Dark in camera means irretrievable information. Dark in post means it's always there, you just need to get it. You can achieve what you want with the right light/cutters/reflectors but it can be complicated to setup and expensive.

Sorry for the wall of text, just trying to help you here  :hug:


Dont excuse yourself, I really appreciate it. As I said, maybe I really DO have to rethink my attitude. I´m sure you know what you are talking about, and I´ll consider it from now on. Afterall, this is a good new reason to practice my post processing skills even more and get better.
I hope you´ll stay tuned and check out my future stuff aswell. Quality criticism in the internet is pretty rare nowadays. Thanks again.
Member
Posts: 3,782
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 8,726.00
#18
Feb 29 2012 01:09pm
Quote (RoOkieTeRra @ Feb 28 2012 10:59am)
I get your point, but I simply dont like the idea of "shooting for the post production" how you call it. Sure, if you are going for a look that can only be created during the post production, you should prepare the photo for it in the shooting process. But you are implying that post production is more important than the actual photographing, and that´s something I´m not really willing to adapt to. Maybe I need to overthink my attitude towards digital photography in general, but at the moment, I´m much rather trying to get away from the excessive post processing instead of getting closer to it. I guess it´s the market that asks for this attitude..... I´m not sure yet if I want to accept that or not.


But anyways, what exactly would be the difference in a post created shadow on the eye, compared to a natural shadow?! Maybe I missunderstood you, but werent you saying I should fill the eyes with light, so that I can make them dark again in the post?


Then why don't you shoot with a 645 camera or 6x7 camera?
Member
Posts: 14,659
Joined: Jan 27 2007
Gold: 78.16
#19
Feb 29 2012 05:23pm
Quote (RoOkieTeRra @ Mar 1 2012 12:49am)
Dont excuse yourself, I really appreciate it. As I said, maybe I really DO have to rethink my attitude. I´m sure you know what you are talking about, and I´ll consider it from now on. Afterall, this is a good new reason to practice my post processing skills even more and get better.
I hope you´ll stay tuned and check out my future stuff aswell. Quality criticism in the internet is pretty rare nowadays. Thanks again.



Finding someone who actually works in the industry and not a forum troll is hard to come by LOL

Just drop the "purist" attitude because it will get you no where unless you just want to shoot art hah

Post production is very important to learn. You need to know your limitiations and what you can do. It always makes your images look better and will also it will save you money in the long run.

Member
Posts: 18,010
Joined: Apr 8 2008
Gold: 8,653.74
#20
Mar 1 2012 03:23pm
Quote (lithfkn @ Feb 29 2012 04:23pm)
Finding someone who actually works in the industry and not a forum troll is hard to come by LOL

Just drop the "purist" attitude because it will get you no where unless you just want to shoot art hah

Post production is very important to learn. You need to know your limitiations and what you can do. It always makes your images look better and will also it will save you money in the long run.


Agree with this sexy beast. "pure" photography was lost in the 1920's.
Go Back To Photography Topic List
Prev123Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2026 d2jsp  Contact