I assume you posted this photo because you want to get ideas on how to improve or for comments of any type.
My comments below are not a criticism of you, your model or your talent or skill. I offer them in a friendly tone of voice with the sole intent to help.
When viewing many of the images here on this forum, it is common to see people use studio flash in such a way that it "flattens" facial features and creates very flat 2 dimensional faces. This is a very common "weakness" of portraits where the use of light is not watched carefully or the image is not carefully exposed.
This same "flattened" effect can happen in an outdoor setting too using natural light.
The result can be a rather "cartoonish" looking face that has no "modeling" with forms (nose/cheeks/jaw/eyesocket). So the face appears flat (like a simple cartoon....an oval of flesh tone with two eyes and a mouth) and this is not "flattering" (at least in my opinion ).
So how does this apply to your photo?
This photo of the man appears as if he has no jaw on the his right side. Another area is the bridge of the nose. It appears very flat (like the jaw line area).
My Simple Suggestion: Avoid overexposure (as appears here) as it can lead to rather flat appearances on three dimensional forms such as a face.
I like the colors in this one, but my eye goes straight to his shoulder as it's totally blown.
I viewed your blog; it looked like you had a fun time shooting this series. In general I liked the framing and processing. The series also has a relaxed charm which is quite appealing. Your lighting skills though, could do with some serious work.
I am not a fan of this type of post processing. Instead of enhancing the image, it overpowers and becomes the main focal point rather than the subject. This is even more apparent in the blog photos.
jerryrock wrote:
I am not a fan of this type of post processing. Instead of enhancing the image, it overpowers and becomes the main focal point rather than the subject. This is even more apparent in the blog photos.
no offense but your age demographic is not my target audience..
Good set Serg. Wow, Miss Teacher is hooot. I think I've seen some better images from you though. Some of the poses got a little simple/static. The processing is signature.
Sergio Mottola wrote:
no offense but your age demographic is not my target audience..
When you learn to listen to constructive criticism you will grow as a photographer, an artist and a person.
There are quite a number of professional photographers in this forum that unlike you, have many years of experience in the field. You could actually learn something if you stop tripping over your own ego (no offense).
Ayden Nathan wrote:
I'm confused how age has anything to do w/ fair advice on your images.
Are your images about the client or your processing? I agree that what Jerry has pointed out is something you need to figure out for yourself.
Most excellent images that I see on this forum high light the subject and not your P skills.
Your portraits appear to be more illustrative than actual portraiture.
I have to agree with everything that has been said so far. The post work, while it is unique, tends to take away focus from the subject itself, which after all is what the focus of a senior picture should be about... the person! The strongest images on the blog are the ones where the processing was minimal. They look fresh and don't detract my focus from the person.
I don't know how long you've been doing photography, but when I first started (and I've noticed when most people start) they tend to rely on post processing more than they should. Either because the photos aren't that strong on their own, or because they have discovered something new and unique and go a little crazy with it. I think you just need to be a little more selective in your editing. Evaluate the photo on its own and then decide if some kind of unique post work will really strengthen the photo or not. And if so, how much is really necassary.
I agree with Jason...I fell into the same trap when starting and still have a bit of a problem with it. While I love your pictures, I'm not sure they work as a senior portrait. It should be about the person and not the image. Now for some sort of fashion campaign or something like that, great. But for a senior portrait, not so much.
scott- thanks
ayden - in fact, age has a HUGE impact on marketing and appeal. my target demographic is not older men, who are rooted in the more traditional style of portraiture. instead, i aim to appeal to younger, stylish, and contemporary clients who trust that rather than creating an image that simply highlights their good features in a conventional way, i will include them in a piece of art unique in composition, processing, and style.
jerry - read above. in fact, i DO take your criticism to heart and acknowledge my weaknesses in the use of strobe lighting and posing. when i master those facets, i will be a force to be reckoned with.
even - the other replies sort of address yours. thanks for taking the time to post, my dude.
i love myself, i love and believe in my work, i love my clients. not to be mistaken for ego. thank you for your honesty.
sam - you da man.
weez - that was actually a compliment. why WONT it work as a senior portrait? who decides what is acceptable or not for a senior photo? why CANT it look like a fashion campaign? because thats what i aim for and thats why my clients pay me hundreds of dollars to shoot their photos, because its NOT like the other senior photos out there.
liam- you're simply seeing things. i havent edited the photo since posting it.
PS: dillon and his dad (dillon's mother passed away ~2 weeks ago at age 50, she was a really wonderful mom/wife) love the photos. they ordered a 15pg leather album.
Sergio Mottola wrote:
jerry - read above. in fact, i DO take your criticism to heart and acknowledge my weaknesses in the use of strobe lighting and posing. when i master those facets, i will be a force to be reckoned with.
i love myself, ilove and believe in my work, i love my clients. not to be mistaken for ego.
You just don't get it........
The word ego is taken directly from Latin, where it is the nominative of the first person singular personal pronoun and is translated as "I myself" to express emphasis. The Latin term ego is used in English to translate Freud's German term Das Ich, which literally means "the I".
In modern-day society, ego has many meanings. It could mean ones self-esteem; an inflated sense of self-worth; or in philosophical terms, ones self.
my so called 'inflated sense of self worth' stems from my life philosophy that has nothing to do with photography.
"you can't love someone else without first loving yourself"
my self-worth is not improperly inflated, rather i merely know my capabilities and don't spend time degrading myself or wallowing in depression. i live my life happily and without regret.
The lack of contrast and cyan cast are not pluses in this particular image. I don't think it is anything out of the ordinary without them, though-- and I definitely don't think it's a work of art.
OP, I think you'd do well to learn from the constructive criticism. You seem to have a brittle ego, which is neither here nor there with respect to your photography skill, but it may prevent you from learning.
Bro, I just looked at your site, and none of it is good. You are young, and your attitude shows it, but keep trying. You may want to be a little more humble, though.
Regards
).