p.2 #6 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
They lit him with copy lighting. Very flat and boring. No sense of anything. One too many umbrellas - you can see 'em in the eyes. Too bad. It could have been a great shot but was ruined by crappy light. And unfortunately, this is often the mark of a photojournalist. Great at found light but not so much at making it.
p.2 #7 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
gdanmitchell wrote:
I'm glad that I haven't aged at all in the past four years... ;-)
Dan
Although some of us may resort to Botox, such procedures have no known effect on the passage of Time, and they can not possibly alter the fact that a few of us around here are becoming older than dirt.
p.2 #8 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
Peter Figen wrote:
They lit him with copy lighting. Very flat and boring. No sense of anything. One too many umbrellas - you can see 'em in the eyes. Too bad. It could have been a great shot but was ruined by crappy light. And unfortunately, this is often the mark of a photojournalist. Great at found light but not so much at making it.
p.2 #9 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
sirimiri wrote:
Yes, it's impressive (maybe in a bad, stressful way?) to see the aging this charge does to you.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I'm glad that I haven't aged at all in the past four years... ;-)
Dan
PetKal wrote:
Although some of us may resort to Botox, such procedures have no known effect on the passage of Time, and they can not possibly alter the fact that a few of us around here are becoming older than dirt.
p.2 #11 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
eskimochaos wrote:
F****** *******. I'm a May 2012 undergraduate and am already making $2,000 less per year with his taxes.
. They are your taxes, not his.
And if you want to lower the amount you pay, it is really easy. Earn less money. And then go F*** yourself. Doesn't feel so good when somebody directs it at you now, does it? I am not an Obama supporter, but seeing as you are a "May 2012 undergraduate," I will give you some advice and say you might want to learn to show a little respect if you ever want to be taken seriously.
p.2 #13 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
PetKal wrote:
There is much truth in that.
That slight shadow for modeling purposes be not needed or even seen by the masses, the aesthetics of such lighting would detract from the intended view. These masses rarely view from gallery walls the fine art of light seeing, do not know of it's magic.
The shine on his forehead bugs me, as does virtually no shadow, not even a hint...press photography at it's finest...ouch...it's still a nice still; my nits are at my wits end...night..
p.2 #16 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
While I agree the lighting is flat. I think the skin tones are preferable to the other 2 samples of of Odeirmo and Panetta (too orange and too red). But then again, it could just be that those Jpegs were improperly saved or convert with the wrong color profile.
p.2 #17 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
They get like 60 seconds to take the shot for the most part from what I hear and they hardly set up fancy lighting or anything at all. You are told go, rush, rush, toss up that this, boom, take, he is off. Done. Unless it has changed or I'm mistaken.
p.2 #19 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera?
All I can say is that I've had more than my share of shoots with absolutely minimal time. I was given about two minutes with Armand Hammer, or another time less than a single minute with the president of Security Pacific bank (remember them?), or a huge fifteen minutes with George Harrision, but somehow was able to make decent light. But remember, this is the official White House photographer, who, I imagine, at least has the ability to set up his lights before and shoot test images with a stand-in. That's what I would do.
Archive 2013 · New Obama White House portrait... guess what camera? 
. They are your taxes, not his.