A few comments. One, you did short lighting with the female, and broad lighting with the guys. Not sure if that's your style, to go with those directions on male vs female. Either way, they look great!
The thing that is most striking to me is the difference in how you posed the female captain vs the two men. You included her legs in her shot, with one leg crossed over the other. This, in my opinion, is a very flattering pose for her, and does a great job showing off her legs. She really looks amazing. I'll just say it. In this pose, she looks sexy in a very good way, and I didn't think it was possible for any soldier to look sexy fully outfitted in a Class A uniform. So kudos to you for that. I don't know if it was intentional, but it really worked for me.
I guess one more comment. The guy with the beret, is he related to Rambo, or do they just have that same tough-guy scowl going. :-)
A few comments. One, you did short lighting with the female, and broad lighting with the guys. Not sure if that's your style, to go with those directions on male vs female. Either way, they look great!
The short vs broad thing has a few factors. I will look at every subject with both, and ultimately its about what I like for a given subject. However, I tend to favor broad these days for a few reasons. First, I think it tends to be a but more “painterly” (even Rembrandt mostly painted his pattern in broad light). Second, given that I generally face subjects slightly to their right to show the personal awards, short lighting often fights with the swoop of the beret resulting in loss of catch-light and also reflects in silver awards and ribbons, blowing highlights. You can work around this stuff but its a pain. Also, while I want to show the awards, I want them more subdued to focus on the face. Turning the subject from the light mutes the awards a bit. I also find the downsides of broad light can be mitigated by flagging and/or burning the broad side cheek to narrow the bright area. In this case, I liked her with the short light and worked around the other issues.
friscoron wrote:
The thing that is most striking to me is the difference in how you posed the female captain vs the two men. You included her legs in her shot, with one leg crossed over the other. This, in my opinion, is a very flattering pose for her, and does a great job showing off her legs. She really looks amazing. I'll just say it. In this pose, she looks sexy in a very good way, and I didn't think it was possible for any soldier to look sexy fully outfitted in a Class A uniform. So kudos to you for that. I don't know if it was intentional, but it really worked for me.
I think photographing female service members is a wonderful challenge balancing femininity and strength/leadership/heroism etc… its always a delicate balance as many of the things we do to make someone look strong/heroic such as shooting upward are directly opposite the way we usually work to flatter female subjects. For these portraits, I want my female subjects to like how they look and feel that the shot respects their service and achievements. So decisions like including the legs are a deliberate part of that balancing act. Some portraits veer more to one side or the other.
friscoron wrote:
I guess one more comment. The guy with the beret, is he related to Rambo, or do they just have that same tough-guy scowl going. :-)
Definitely got my vote!
Ron
You don't seem to want to accept the fact that you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best! With guns, with knives, with his bare hands! A man who's been trained to ignore pain! To ignore weather! To live off the land! To eat things that would make a billy goat puke!
A few comments. One, you did short lighting with the female, and broad lighting with the guys. Not sure if that's your style, to go with those directions on male vs female. Either way, they look great!
The thing that is most striking to me is the difference in how you posed the female captain vs the two men. You included her legs in her shot, with one leg crossed over the other. This, in my opinion, is a very flattering pose for her, and does a great job showing off her legs. She really looks amazing. I'll just say it. In this pose, she looks sexy in a very good way, and I didn't think it was possible for any soldier to look sexy fully outfitted in a Class A uniform. So kudos to you for that. I don't know if it was intentional, but it really worked for me.
I guess one more comment. The guy with the beret, is he related to Rambo, or do they just have that same tough-guy scowl going. :-)
Definitely got my vote!
Ron...Show more →
________
+1. I might also add that the dark tone of her uniform is nicely separated from the (also dark tone) background.
Love it, Evan! I really appreciate that you consider different lighting schemes for each of your portraits, and decide what works best uniquely for them.
Love what you had to say about Rambo! (or maybe you were talking about the guy in the picture!)
friscoron wrote:
and I didn't think it was possible for any soldier to look sexy fully outfitted in a Class A uniform.
Ron
You haven't been looking at the right soldiers then :P
To the OP: great work. Not sure if you textured/sharpened the men's faces (vs smoothing) but if you DID, it's noticeable in pic 2. If you DIDN'T (above and beyond normal routines), then damn that's a sharp lens
I want to yell at the 3rd guy to get a damned haircut - hair touching ears. Then again, I haven't kept up with ARs in a long time and his facial expression almost forgives the sin
