Free Word Invitation Templates Fashion Show

Own image critique in hindsight to be!

Inspired by a video of Martin Krolop http://www.krolop-gerst.com/blog/
times today I would like to address the issue image critique in hindsight !

something straight away. Until recently, I've done in the studio or via histogram of the exposure of my pictures! This is tedious, time consuming and not really purposeful, because I had read the available light is always subjective in the bar chart!

That changes now, because I put a reasonable meter risen have! I would refrain no longer, I shall add, even without a model can now objectively see the amount of lights!

My advice:

"Those who work in the studio comes, sooner or later, not around a light meter!"

Now to the actual topic!
Now it is probably every way you make when looking at the pictures after the fact at once errors are discovered that you should not have, or would at least have a notice as a photographer!
So also with me ...
can now say again but one that can save Photoshop certain things. In my view, It may not have been intended that I edit in retrospect must disappear for ever let my blunder to shoot at! So overall I
times today published a picture from a series and will look to show times and error, and what I really like!

Here is an example image:

The image is "out of Cam and was received with 5 flashes!
a main light in the form of a Octabox behind me! 2 Highlights , in the form of 2 Strip Lights angle behind the model. 1 hair light , which has a small Octabox was on the model! And the last lightning was a standard reflector with a grid (honeycomb) for the background! The

as benchmarks for the subsequent more detailed examination of the picture!

Let's start with the negative points!

like What I do:

1. The illumination of the background ! Wanted a spotartigere illumination was behind the model. I should have used so better tube as attachment for the flash!
2. I would take the Octabox, rather them take a Dish , the Plastität of the models, and the clothes would have better brought to bear. (Of course obliquely from above) This would, however, a course on the model magic. I think in this case would be a 6ter flash with Dish as the main light and fill light Octabox been a better solution. I have not seen, so I have to live with it.
3. The case of the dress below ! Due to the wide case, and the relatively narrow image section occurs before the viewer as if the model is still relatively strong hips, which in reality was not so!
4. The small finger of your left hand, spread apart!
5. The folds on chest, could have been put better! But I did not just get seen!

But all is still the same bad!


What I liked:

1. The closely linked hair leave, effect lights come into their well and separate the best model from the background.
2. The staring into the camera speaks directly to the viewer, I find precisely such glances at the camera extremely fascinating, because I immediately addressed as a viewer feel
3. The intensive, yet distanced view of the model, fits well with the Farbichkeit of the image together, which is underlined by gray and blue tones a cool atmosphere
4. The nose and chin shadows my opinion fall and sit perfectly nice central location. Solely had the the Lichtcharacteristik can be stronger bothers me here!
5. What I do not like about the the arms . Thus I find the film editor and I support the best use of the grazielen body of my models!
6. What else I find good, close the section above and below, where you should consider it just the outfit.

All in all I like the image very well! Nevertheless, I must confess that I had 2-3 more Patzer to notice!
is the nunmal ... But you have his pictures just sometimes can take down!

I hope this post could you take something for you and your works sometimes viewed from a different light!
Mir hats again at least helped, particularly with regard constructive criticism, as only a "malign" brings an image to that little. You better tell him also what you had done differently and why!

In the sense
Happy
Micha