This was a new location for me, though it may look like much of my usual Florida images to some. I thought this session didn't go very well but I was actually a happy with some of the images. My exposures were all over the place. Ok, whatever, enough excuses.
Wow, where was this? So exotic. Sick session Tony. 15 is marvelous. Goes to show that any location will work with the right lighting, pose and composition. Don't like the red in 2. Looks artificial. Pose works very well however. Dig their outfits as well. Did you dress them or did they come that way?
Tony, I know what you mean about awkward sessions. If you hadn't mentioned it, I probably wouldn't have noticed... but since you did, I did.
The biggest thing to remember is that it's probably their personalities anyway, so even if you felt that way, these are still the best pictures they've ever gotten of themselves. Often times the shoots I feel the worst about give me to most positive feedback from the couples. Not sure why that is.
Thank you. She had such an awesome look in that series.
clicksintime wrote:
I like them all, but 4, 10 and 12 are my favorites.
Thanks. I think those selections tend toward something that's a lot more formal for me than I would normally do, and I guess I made some (un)conscious adjustments that way due to this particular couple. I think 10 is really strong with some classic positioning in a modern composition (cropped head, landscape, see Evan's "bumper crop" post).
scott shoemake wrote:
catchlight in her left eye on #3 is ridiculous dude! nice set for sure, but that one blows them all away.
Thanks Scott. When I first read your comment, all I could think about was the catchlight - which I don't think I was really paying any attention to when I shot it. So I kind of "skipped" it in my self-critique thinking it (the catchlight) wasn't a big deal. But when I come back to it, I see expressions and a moment that I really like. Then later reading Daniel's comment below, I realize that that image has one of my go-to third-heavy compositions. So I like that one a lot more now than I first did.
radioblurs wrote:
scott stole the words from my mouth! 3 is so awesome, man-THAT's vintage Schreiber-love it!
daniel
Thank you Dan. I'm beginning now to appreciate it for it's me-ness.
Conradp04 wrote:
#3 for me the one and only azn g..
Man... some of you people are just amazing. I wish I had that type of creativety. Where the hell does it come from? Can I buy some?
Thank you. Your compliment is greatly appreciated. But I would challenge your assumption about being creative. If I keep falling towards things that worked before (compositions, lighting techniques) and don't change up, am I still being creative?
saucyone wrote:
Wow alot of great images but my favorite is number 7, I like 3 too but the expression in 7 makes it better for me.
Thanks. 7 is a nice look. I would compare it as much softer and slightly happeir than the ones in 3 and 4. In deference to outright joy, I like to tend toward expressions that are slight melancholy - happy, but reserved maybe - cautious perhaps.
Tony Hoffer wrote:
Tony, I know what you mean about awkward sessions. If you hadn't mentioned it, I probably wouldn't have noticed... but since you did, I did.
The biggest thing to remember is that it's probably their personalities anyway, so even if you felt that way, these are still the best pictures they've ever gotten of themselves. Often times the shoots I feel the worst about give me to most positive feedback from the couples. Not sure why that is.
It would have to be because you did an awesome job of being likable, making them comfortable, and working within their personalities - but since it wasn't easy (for whatever reason), you feel as if you hadn't done enough. I can only hope my results are similar to yours because that's exactly what I usually feel like.
The eyes have it in 15. Guy looks like he's a cop.. just his personality and haircut, even if he's not a cop... also the WA distortion in 14 makes his head look a bit goofy, otherwise would've been a much stronger image (perhaps shoot at 50mm instead of what I presume is 35mm?).
