Steady Hand wrote:
Nice expression.
Welcome back to posting here.
Shoot more, post more, comment more, learn more!
Hey Steady Hand,
I've been shooting almost every day. And now I'm studying at the university which makes it even harder to find some time in between to edit photos and upload them on the Internet.
j.curtis wrote:
Looks a little over-exposed on my monitor.
Hey Curtis,
you're the first one to mention that, so I think it must be your monitors fault.
I'm sorry for that.
Rodolfo Paiz wrote:
Love it exactly as is. Gorgeous shot. I do wonder if it would look as good, or better, or not so good, with a slight reduction in exposure?
Hey Rodolfo,
I tried and it doesn't look as good as this version, believe me.
I'm looking forward to some more comments.
Thanks everyone.
-Sebastian
Sebi wrote:
Sorry, I don't understand. Who is that?
A previous poster above - who made a similar comment. Actually - the highlights are slightly blown (that's measurement not the monitor) and the image very light - but partly a matter of taste I suppose.
Well, why don't you just show us more awesome 135L pics from a 5D2 huh? My wallet is gonna hate you...
I like #1 the way it is. So sharp and the eyes are exposed just right, so everything is peachy with me. #2 is equally good, nice work with scattered light patches!
#1 might be the tiniest bit blown, but I think that's right where it should be. A photo like that has to have an overall brightness. One stop darker might have been technically correct, but the photo would have suffered.
paulhodson wrote:
A previous poster above - who made a similar comment. Actually - the highlights are slightly blown (that's measurement not the monitor) and the image very light - but partly a matter of taste I suppose.
I prefer the effect in the second image.
Ohh I see, that's ok.
Steady Hand wrote:
I like both images.
One for expression (top)
Second for expression (different from laugh) AND exposure AND composition.
I hope that helps you....and you did a good job with both models. Nice to see and have this kind of expressive and "summer" image in your file.
Thanks, Steady.
Just to clarify.. it's one and the same model in both pictures.
But when you don't see that, it means we did a good job I suppose?
4honor wrote:
Well, why don't you just show us more awesome 135L pics from a 5D2 huh? My wallet is gonna hate you...
I like #1 the way it is. So sharp and the eyes are exposed just right, so everything is peachy with me. #2 is equally good, nice work with scattered light patches!
Ohh you better stop whatching my website, blog or the next postings here on fm. I'm gonna post so much images of the 135L and the 5D next time... woooohooo you better lock you bank account.
Cableaddict wrote:
#1 might be the tiniest bit blown, but I think that's right where it should be. A photo like that has to have an overall brightness. One stop darker might have been technically correct, but the photo would have suffered.
I REALLY like it.
That's what I'm talking about, right there.
I'm glad you see it the same way I do. Sometimes you gotta mess around with photography rules.
Ohh by the way, if you wanna see a short behind the scenes video check my blog on www.le-photographer.blogspot.com (you can see even more out takes and making offs):
