Now these pics are awsome, but I would love to see the same pics taken with a 135/2, using the same lightning and post proc. Admit though those 1:1 crops are gorgeous!
How large must the picture be to see the difference between a 135 and 200?
These are very, very nice portraits. Well done!
I do think you could probably achieve close to the same look with a 135L, though
you' have a little less compression of facial features, but I also admit to never having
shot the 200/2. The bokeh is special.
I think it's mostly your posing and lighting that are paying the bills for you though.
Great skill is the determining factor, but that lens doesn't hurt.
Thanks for posting. My senior portraits weren't even close to these. My photographer
didn't even manage to nail the focus on my formal. .
John,
One question: Have you ever shot the 200/2.8L in a similar way, and how did
you like the results? I know the 200/2L is in another league, but I personally
like a little greater depth of field for most of what I shoot, and I'm curious how
close to this look I could get with the (much) cheaper lens [which I already own].
Great photos you have there, but I do have to say, some things are distracting like bra straps and chairs in front of the person. Also on your skin retouching, you blurred some parts and not the others so there is a patch of sharpness where there shouldn't be (no, this wasn't DOF).
Fantastic photos,
are you using the flashes in ETTL mode or shooting manual with the highspeed sync?
have you had a chance to try out the pocketwizards version of radiopoppers yet?
Any issues with range on the radio poppers one thing holding me back from the wizards are the reduced range with my first gen 580's
Matt Leitholt wrote:
. Also on your skin retouching, you blurred some parts and not the others so there is a patch of sharpness where there shouldn't be (no, this wasn't DOF).
Just helping
I'm mighty envious of your skill and gear lineup.
that explains it then because i jsut couldnt figure out how the DOF could make certain parts of one of the faces blurred and others sharp in such a way
that lens sure creates BG separation!
ina couple cases so much it almost looks like a fake cutout pasted onto a backdrop...
I think it's the rim-shot and soft-box flash that achieves that effect. Studio-style lighting in vernacular environments often has that effect because the light on the person is incongruous with the light on the background. But these are very skilful and technically accomplished images, regardless of whether you like that style.
"Did you PP the whites in the eye in some of these?"
Yep. Contact lenses wreak havoc with kids' eyes these days. Regarding the bra straps, Matt, the girls choose in advance whether it's important to have them show or not - that's not my call. (Most don't care, as evidenced by any brief foray into your local mall.)
Regarding the 'cutout' look, it's perhaps much more evident on these tiny Web images that it is on a 16x24 or 20x30 print. Once enlarged, there's no question that it's the real deal.
brainiac wrote:
I think it's the rim-shot and soft-box flash that achieves that effect. Studio-style lighting in vernacular environments often has that effect because the light on the person is incongruous with the light on the background. But these are very skilful and technically accomplished images, regardless of whether you like that style.
yeah you are probably right, hat sort of lighting probably accentuates the background separation
jhartman wrote:
"Why have you chosen to use the 200F2 wide open?"
Because I can. ;-) Actually, I want a look that is not easily duplicated. No plug-in can create this look. It's not easy, and it's not cheap, which helps keep my style unique. Also, my clients really like this look. And since beauty is in the eye of the checkbook holder, I like it, too.
"What do you use to fire your 580s?"
I use an ST-E2 with RadioPoppers.
Thank you.
Your images are truly stunning, almost shocking. I'm afraid that my head was stuck inside the box. To me, the term "senior portraits" conjures up formal studio type shooting with greater depth of field so that more of the subject's head is in focus.
I understand how that lens could produce the so-called "cut out look" when the subject is so sharp in the areas that you have choosen to be in focus, and the backgrounds have such creamy bokeh. I have seen that effect, to a lesser degree, in some of my sports shooting when the subject is far removed from the bg.
Let me join in the praise of these accomplished, admirable and creatively personalized portraits. Alas, the lens is more accessible (if it can be so-called) than the skills needed to attain this level of achievement. To paraphrase a previous poster, if you get bored with the skills, i'll pick them up so sending them won't be necessary.
.