So... I've done two doubleblind posts. And even though there have been great comments (and tough ones). Overall, I don't like the process. My reason isn't because I want more praise... or that I was upset by the constructive criticism that was received. It's mostly because, how can you REALLY critique if you don't know it's me? How can you tell that I've grown... or that I'm stretching my normal boundaries... or that I'm trying new things with success (or failure).
That's all part of being in FM for me. You leave me feedback based on what you already know of my work... the level you expect is based on that foreknowledge. Those of you who are new and haven't gotten that footing yet... keep posting and creating a name for yourself and you WILL get it... especially if you keep taking advice and improving.
But to just toss images out there without the "story" or context... without the insight of who the photographer was... well, it just lacks a key ingredient in coming up with the right things to say. So I won't be doing it any more. I want you to be honest with me AND know it was me who posted. Is that too much to ask? And when I do something good... I don't want you to stretch for criticism just because you think I need to be knocked down a peg or two... cause I guarantee you that I knock myself down enough already.
SO... here's me posting my images from the last doubleblind... the one that over 200 people saw, but on which only 3 commented. It's one of my favorite shoots. The couple asked for something akin to a perfume ad... they loved serious expressions more than smiles. They wanted to feel like models, not an engaged couple. It pushed me to think differently and to process differently.
I was one of your 200 views and didn't respond because I didn't have enough time. As I don't have much time now, I will leave a few generic comments.
Overall, very nice sound images. The processing ties the images together and is pleasing. The only thing I noticed was that they seem a wee bit stiff in a few shots.
This WAS quite a departure for you. I definitely didn't think Mel when I saw these. Some great stuff in this set. There are a few I'd watch her chin on... not egregious but a little tiny move of her chin or a slightly higher angle would've helped her some.
2 & 13 were my faves. I meant to comment in the blind thread, but I've been busy the past 24.
Thanks guys! And I promise that it's not so much about getting a LOT of comments... as it is making sure the ones I do get are based on a full story and not a partial one. Jeff got pretty slammed in his first post... but had he just posted openly and told the whole context, people wouldn't have spent so much time on the expressionless comments and could have really done more praising of his technical abilities. Cause he ROCKED that shoot without me and gave the clients exactly what they wanted.
I agree about her chin... it's not so much a "double" as it is that it's low and points downward, creating definition that can be unbecoming... I'll watch out for that on the bridals and wedding day.
Not knocking your images in any way, but if photographs don't stand out and create excitement just because people don't know the name behind them then the the photos might need some rethinking.
That being said, you've got some nice images here. But watch your exposure! Her shirt is too hot in a few of these.
you brought up an interesting point Mel...there is sometimes a reason behind the way images look..
I too looked at these and thought, mmm, good solid images, but they lack the happy, joy, love that I ussually go for in an engagement set and I never bothered to take the time to comment, as I was in a hurry.
now, knowing what you were going for, i think you totally acheived that....i particurlarly liked the last 5 images.
Harsh light - too harsh. She needed - the shoot needed - professional makeup. Awkward crops at the knee. Double chin/waddle prominent. The shadows are too blocked up. Her shirt is too wrinkly. #21 - crotch shot.
The road and fence are too posy/cutesy.
The left hand shot of #21 is stronger - his arm could be taken out.
They are too close to the wall maybe.
The strobe shots are too stun-bunny/pasted on looking.
Maybe a few more without that white sweater thing - pure white is generally not a friend to anyone. She is too camera-aware in most of the photos.
jwesley02 wrote:
Not knocking your images in any way, but if photographs don't stand out and create excitement just because people don't know the name behind them then the the photos might need some rethinking.
That being said, you've got some nice images here. But watch your exposure! Her shirt is too hot in a few of these.
I totally agree that images need to stand out... and when you know who took the shots, sometimes that makes a big difference. Evan would have never guessed these were mine... the fact that they were made a different impact on him than if he didn't know at all. And this is part of what I'm saying. It's not always about the images being the best in the world... it's whether or not they are good or better or different from the other things that the photographer has taken. And that's where I want my critiques to come from.
On my screen, her shirt never loses detail. It's brighter in a few, but I still see every bend and fold.
#'s 2,5,12,15,24 those are the best and match what the vision you typed out for us. The rest honestly IMHO don't match up with the others, I think this is a big change for your normal and it shows but in a good way. I think you could improve tremendously each time you do one of these.
I've been hesitating posting any crits lately as I've not shot anything in a few months, May-Aug I've got plenty to do but I'm in a dead zone right now.
ContagiousIdea wrote:
#'s 2,5,12,15,24 those are the best and match what the vision you typed out for us. The rest honestly IMHO don't match up with the others, I think this is a big change for your normal and it shows but in a good way. I think you could improve tremendously each time you do one of these.
We have basically the same favorites.
It was tough for me to think to radically differently. Some things worked and some didn't. But I did learn a lot!! It isn't a look that I'd want to necessarily shoot ALL of the time... but I enjoyed it as an escape from my "normal".
It's funny cause I purposely didn't comment because I knew they were yours as soon as I saw them. I agree on the Doubleblind thing. I give different critique if it's a seasoned pro or a beginner. It's not cause I feel differently about the poster, but simply because it helps to know how to be helpful.
With that said, I think #'s 13 and 26 accomplished exactly what you said your goal was. It seems like the others had you working against your natural instincts in a way. Almost as if you wanted to leave your comfort zone, but weren't totally confident about doing it.
I didn't see the db-post. That's my excuse. As for these, I think you handled it well. The problem you faced, if I may say so, is one I've faced before: people want to look like models, have photos resembling mega-buck-ads but seem to forget that the glossy shots entail a heck of lot more than an afternoon outdoors with one photog; no make-up artists, stylists, clothing consultants, assistants everywhere handing you cameras, lenses, holding reflectors, placing lights, fans, etc. etc. Considering this, again, I think you did well. The couple should be happy with what you accomplished. The only nit I have is the space in which the people are placed. It doesn't always feel "right", know what I'm saying?
As for the purpose of db-posting - I've wondered about that myself. And truly, I don't think it's db, unless work would be posted AS IF it were from another shooter.... now THAT would be interesting!
Tony Hoffer wrote:
It's funny cause I purposely didn't comment because I knew they were yours as soon as I saw them. I agree on the Doubleblind thing. I give different critique if it's a seasoned pro or a beginner. It's not cause I feel differently about the poster, but simply because it helps to know how to be helpful.
With that said, I think #'s 13 and 26 accomplished exactly what you said your goal was. It seems like the others had you working against your natural instincts in a way. Almost as if you wanted to leave your comfort zone, but weren't totally confident about doing it....Show more →
I feel like Jodi Foster's character in Maverick!! What were my tells I fought so hard to use different locations!!! Haha!
"The couple asked for something akin to a perfume ad... they loved serious expressions more than smiles. They wanted to feel like models, not an engaged couple." - Mel
You could've included that description with the db post so we knew your intent. That's allowed in db posting, isn't it?
Brian Lingle wrote:
"The couple asked for something akin to a perfume ad... they loved serious expressions more than smiles. They wanted to feel like models, not an engaged couple." - Mel
You could've included that description with the db post so we knew your intent. That's allowed in db posting, isn't it?
I am really on the fence regarding the doubleblind posts... one side sees the positive and the other side of me has this exact argument. I can't say I am particularly familiar with your work, so I can't comment if this a huge step forward or back but what I can say is that I see some definite winners here. Given your stated goals.... i.e. "perfume ad style, serious expressions, no smile" I think that shots like 14, 19, 22 work marvelously. I think that 20 is really close... but he's channeling Derek Zoolander just a little too much. I really like 25 and 17, but I don't think they seem to fit the stated goal... that being said, I'm sure the client will like/or does like them even though they aren't serious/no smiling style. I'm not a huge of 7-10, it looks overflashed to me and the lighting on them doesn't seem to go at all with what appears to be the natural lighting.
RichardLavigne wrote:
I am really on the fence regarding the doubleblind posts... one side sees the positive and the other side of me has this exact argument. I can't say I am particularly familiar with your work, so I can't comment if this a huge step forward or back but what I can say is that I see some definite winners here. Given your stated goals.... i.e. "perfume ad style, serious expressions, no smile" I think that shots like 14, 19, 22 work marvelously. I think that 20 is really close... but he's channeling Derek Zoolander just a little too much. I really like 25 and 17, but I don't think they seem to fit the stated goal... that being said, I'm sure the client will like/or does like them even though they aren't serious/no smiling style. I'm not a huge of 7-10, it looks overflashed to me and the lighting on them doesn't seem to go at all with what appears to be the natural lighting....Show more →
Thanks, Richard. I think I tried to give them a few smiles just so that mom and dad wouldn't think everything was overly dramatic.
I agree that the flash got a little out of hand. We'll have to reign that in.
Mel, I like 7-10. Its the unrealistic lighting that makes me dig them ever more than if the ambient was balanced. Its nice to step outside of the "norm" and do your own thing and I say well done and artsy, dramatic pics!
Talofa wrote:
Mel, I like 7-10. Its the unrealistic lighting that makes me dig them ever more than if the ambient was balanced. Its nice to step outside of the "norm" and do your own thing and I say well done and artsy, dramatic pics!
Thanks! Only, I'm Mel. (edited to add: Ha! You changed it and now I look dumb!)
I do like their "headshots" (torso shots??)... I thought the other poster was talking about the pier shots where they were sitting. I do think I could have toned the flash down on those. Not to the point where it met ambient, but maybe where the girl wasn't so harsh.
but in a good way. I think you could improve tremendously each time you do one of these.
I fought so hard to use different locations!!! Haha!