Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | People Photography | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2022 · Patrick

  
 
Dneufarth
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Patrick


Patrick frequently puts on a Spiderman costume to do charity events, I really enjoyed meeting hima truly genuine young man. As always, C&C is greatly appreciated. Derek







Jul 09, 2022 at 06:46 AM
story_teller
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Patrick


Great expression and crop! It does look like the DoF could have been a tad wider. One eye and one cheek are in focus and the others are not. Opposite with eyebrows. If that was intentional, never mind!


Jul 09, 2022 at 08:02 AM
Danpbphoto
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Patrick


Nice tight crop Derek! The soft focus works well here. The lines are clear, tones excellent and the viewer's eyes do not wonder all around.

Dan



Jul 09, 2022 at 10:06 AM
DanielScott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Patrick


Personally, I don't like the crop, and I wish the depth of field wasn't so thin because I think some more detail in his skin would add a lot to this photo.

f/1.2 is a tough aperture setting for a close-in portrait like this and in my opinion was the wrong choice of aperture setting. I feel like this shot is missing something, and perhaps it's lost in the crop and in the incredibly shallow depth of field. I like a strong connection, but I'm just not able to connect well with a portrait that cuts so much of the face off and has such a small sliver if detail where it is in focus. I think perhaps if this were shot at least at f/2 it would have enough to keep both eyes in focus and enough skin detail to to really appreciate, but otherwise I just have a hard time feeling satisfied with the connection when I view this. I'm curious to see the un-cropped version.



Jul 10, 2022 at 04:30 AM
Dneufarth
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Patrick


story_teller wrote:
Great expression and crop! It does look like the DoF could have been a tad wider. One eye and one cheek are in focus and the others are not. Opposite with eyebrows. If that was intentional, never mind!


Thank you very much, the tight crop and ridiculously shallow dof are choices.



Jul 10, 2022 at 06:17 AM
Dneufarth
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Patrick


Danpbphoto wrote:
Nice tight crop Derek! The soft focus works well here. The lines are clear, tones excellent and the viewer's eyes do not wonder all around.

Dan


Thank you Dan very much.



Jul 10, 2022 at 06:17 AM
Dneufarth
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Patrick


DanielScott wrote:
Personally, I don't like the crop, and I wish the depth of field wasn't so thin because I think some more detail in his skin would add a lot to this photo.

f/1.2 is a tough aperture setting for a close-in portrait like this and in my opinion was the wrong choice of aperture setting. I feel like this shot is missing something, and perhaps it's lost in the crop and in the incredibly shallow depth of field. I like a strong connection, but I'm just not able to connect well with a portrait that cuts so much of the
...Show more

Daniel, thank you so much for the input. I know that this style is not for everyone. I admire your work for its precision, and how clean your post work is. My personal taste for my personal work is in your face, and in this case, I love the swirling, topographical, plane of focus. Although, I will admit that I would prefer that the left eye was a tad sharper, but to get both eyes would have required at least f2.8, and the swirl would be gone. As requested here is the un-cropped version.







Jul 10, 2022 at 06:35 AM
Danpbphoto
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Patrick


Both very well done. A viewer's choice!
Dan



Jul 10, 2022 at 09:25 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Patrick


Dneufarth wrote:
Daniel, thank you so much for the input. I know that this style is not for everyone. I admire your work for its precision, and how clean your post work is. My personal taste for my personal work is in your face, and in this case, I love the swirling, topographical, plane of focus. Although, I will admit that I would prefer that the left eye was a tad sharper, but to get both eyes would have required at least f2.8, and the swirl would be gone. As requested here is the un-cropped version.


Interesting point about your preference for the swirl. It sounds as though it is something you find attractive (additive).
Compared to Daniel's points, it sounds as his comments are things he finds as detractions (subtractive).

Just a comparative point that we all have to give consideration to those things that are additive vs. those things that are subtractive to our goals for a given image. Sometimes, one outweighs the other. How much any given audience will find the detractors vs. attractors is variable, but it is something to be aware of when the quid pro quo relationship of our choices is in play. One person's attractor, can generate another person's detractor ... vice verse.

I think for me, this one is more of a "umm, skinny is tough, just missed ... but, still gets the job done with some intimacy". I never went "swirl, how cool", otoh. I tend to find that the large central oof area of the nose (general to all images, not specific to this one) to be a detractor, en route to the eyes or mouth, whenever folks go this skinny on the topography of the facial contours. But, that's just me. Others will love it.

I'd be really curious to see the same shot at 1.2, 1.4, 1.8, 2.0 ... to find the "sweet spot" from the subject distance for this one. My guess would be that 1.4 or 1.8 would retain the topography (attractor), and reduce / minimize the incongruent (detractor) of the focus on the eyes. And, if the "slightly tilted plane" (see below) is in play, I think that it would retain those attributes, even if stopped down a smidge (vs. a lot).

Maybe an exercise for another day.

Anyway, looks like you had a good session.



Edited on Jul 10, 2022 at 09:52 AM · View previous versions



Jul 10, 2022 at 09:31 AM
bnfotografie
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Patrick


Dneufarth wrote:
I love the swirling, topographical, plane of focus.



This isn't a criticism, just a straight question. I'm not seeing the "swirl" referred to here. Can you enlighten me?

Thanks,
Brent




Jul 10, 2022 at 09:37 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Patrick


bnfotografie wrote:
This isn't a criticism, just a straight question. I'm not seeing the "swirl" referred to here. Can you enlighten me?

Thanks,
Brent

+1

As I look at the areas of focus, I see the top right eyebrow, the left eye and the mouth / right side of mustache as prominent areas of focus (cheek to a lesser degree, but still in the circular path). The three create a "three points of a circle" that generates a circular movement of sorts ... kind of on a slightly tilted plane. That, being different from a "swirly" bokeh (which was my first thought about "swirl") kind of effect. Maybe, more of a rotating galaxy, than a spinning pinwheel kind of thing (says guessing)?

Not sure if this is what was meant by the swirl, but it's the closest I can find to the circular aspect of a swirl, as I study it.

Either way, this one has given us cause to study / think.



Jul 10, 2022 at 09:46 AM
DanielScott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Patrick


Well as always I am careful to make it clear that my critiques are only subjective and based on my personal preferences and standards. I understand that photography is inherently subjective so I never draw a line in the sand regarding a right or wrong way to do portrait photography.


Jul 10, 2022 at 11:16 AM
Danpbphoto
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Patrick


DanielScott wrote:
Well as always I am careful to make it clear that my critiques are only subjective and based on my personal preferences and standards. I understand that photography is inherently subjective so I never draw a line in the sand regarding a right or wrong way to do portrait photography.


Couldn't agree more!
I have to remember to remove what I perceive the poster is presenting and try to actually SEE what he is presenting..Yeah an explanation helps...... narrow my focus. And we have a winner!!!
We have some super fine photographer's here and there is no 1, or even more, category that can define en masse! Crap( not the images),... that gets boring IMHO.
The poster's here, on this thread, have been around awhile, or post mucho plenty, and much to observe and learn from!
Dan


Edited on Jul 10, 2022 at 01:45 PM · View previous versions



Jul 10, 2022 at 12:05 PM
Dneufarth
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Patrick


RustyBug wrote:
+1

As I look at the areas of focus, I see the top right eyebrow, the left eye and the mouth / right side of mustache as prominent areas of focus (cheek to a lesser degree, but still in the circular path). The three create a "three points of a circle" that generates a circular movement of sorts ... kind of on a slightly tilted plane. That, being different from a "swirly" bokeh (which was my first thought about "swirl") kind of effect. Maybe, more of a rotating galaxy, than a spinning pinwheel kind of thing (says guessing)?

Not sure if this
...Show more

Swirl was certainly the wrong word for me to use, but you have stated my intention much better. Thank you.



Jul 10, 2022 at 12:46 PM
Dneufarth
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Patrick


DanielScott wrote:
Well as always I am careful to make it clear that my critiques are only subjective and based on my personal preferences and standards. I understand that photography is inherently subjective so I never draw a line in the sand regarding a right or wrong way to do portrait photography.


Daniel, it occurs to me that I might not have been clear regarding your comments. I hope it was understood that when I wrote, in your face, that I meant that I prefer an in-your-face style for much of my portrait work. I agree with everything you said in both of your comments.



Jul 10, 2022 at 12:53 PM
bnfotografie
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Patrick


Here's my perspective. It's neither right nor wrong, but simply an explanation of how my eyes work. When I look at a portrait my attention goes first to the eyes. I'm of the school of thought that the eyes are the windows to the soul and that they reveal a great deal about the subject. I think the shallow dof could have worked well in this portrait if both eyes were tack sharp, but they aren't. What keeps happening when I look at this is that my eyes are repeatedly pulled toward the oof areas and I have to force myself to look back to the sharp areas. It's exacerbated by the oof area also being the lightest part of the image which further adds to the pull away from the sharp eye. For that reason, I'd have to say this portrait comes close but doesn't quite make it for me. I would just add that I appreciate that you are trying new techniques and this one is worth perfecting rather than abandoning.
Cheers,
Brent



Jul 11, 2022 at 07:08 AM
bnfotografie
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Patrick




story_teller wrote:
One eye and one cheek are in focus and the others are not. Opposite with eyebrows.


I noticed that as well and am still trying to figure out how that happens.
Brent



Jul 11, 2022 at 07:22 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Patrick


bnfotografie wrote:
I noticed that as well and am still trying to figure out how that happens.
Brent

Field curvature, coupled with contour depth and/or non parallel planes? I think many folks assume a flat field (or mild curvature) ... and that's not always a given.

Different lens might yield different results. But also, with a razor thin dof, slight misalignment between subject and film plane angularity are likely to be more noticeable than stopped down a bit.

That's where I think that "too thin" can be an issue, at times, depending.

Take notice of the original capture being offset. Then take notice of the difference in both size and focus of the ears.

The crop is presented as nearly centered, yet the capture was not.



Jul 11, 2022 at 09:10 AM





FM Forums | People Photography | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.