Weekly Assignment #72: Candlelit Portrait

[Nikolai]

Well, let's do this one. It's tough, but if done right, you may get yourself a wall-hanger.
This challenge is about a portrait in candle light - or at least in what appears to be a candle light. :wink
No additional visible light source or the evidence of thereof should be present.
Humans only please.
One portrait per entry, multiple entries are OK.
PS OK, too, since you most likely will need it, just don't go overboard, it's about photography, not about retouching.
Let's lit some candles!

[nstam]

Well, let's do this one. It's tough, but if done right, you may get yourself a wall-hanger.
This challenge is about a portrait in candle light - or at least in what appears to be a candle light. :wink
No additional visible light source or the evidence of thereof should be present.
Humans only please.
One portrait per entry, multiple entries are OK.
PS OK, too, since you most likely will need it, just don't go overboard, it's about photography, not about retouching.
Let's lit some candles!

okay im sticking with this image!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2095/2369364640_65b61f56a8.jpg

original exif (only auto contrast, and resize in photoshop):
Exif IFD0

* Camera Make = Canon
* Camera Model = Canon EOS 20D
* X-Resolution = 72/1 = 72
* Y-Resolution = 72/1 = 72
* X/Y-Resolution Unit = inch (2)
* Last Modified Date/Time = 2008:03:29 00:29:41
* Y/Cb/Cr Positioning (Subsampling) = co-sited / datum point (2)
* Custom Rendered = normal process (0)
* Exposure Mode = auto exposure (0)
* White Balance = auto (0)
* Scene Capture Type = standard (0)

Exif Sub IFD

* Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) = 6/10 second = 1/1.66667 second = 0.6 second
* Lens F-Number/F-Stop = 56/10 = F5.6
* Exposure Program = aperture priority (3)
* ISO Speed Ratings = 1600
* Exif Version = 0221
* Original Date/Time = 2008:03:29 00:29:41
* Digitization Date/Time = 2008:03:29 00:29:41
* Components Configuration = 0x01,0x02,0x03,0x00 / YCbCr
* Shutter Speed Value (APEX) = 48298/65536
Shutter Speed (Exposure Time) = 1/1.67 second
* Aperture Value (APEX) = 325770/65536
Aperture = F5.6
* Exposure Bias (EV) = 0/2 = 0
* Metering Mode = partial (6)
* Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
* Focal Length = 160/1 mm = 160 mm
* Maker Note =
* FlashPix Version = 0100
* Colour Space = sRGB (1)
* Image Width = 2336 pixels
* Image Height = 3504 pixels
* Focal Plane X-Resolution = 2336000/590 = 3959.32
* Focal Plane Y-Resolution = 3504000/885 = 3959.32
* Focal Plane X/Y-Resolution Unit = inch (2)
(have to change date on 20D, camera one day ahead)
~n8

[Nikolai]

okay im sticking with this image!
Thank you!:thumb
Is this really a candle?:wink

[nstam]

Thank you!:thumb
Is this really a candle?:wink


oh yea! this was the other image that i was going to use, but it isnt really portrait... it more artistic than anything else. but you can see the candles...

this isnt the assignment image! =P

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nstam/2367710379/

[Nikolai]

oh yea! this was the other image that i was going to use, but it isnt really portrait... it more artistic than anything else. but you can see the candles...
this isnt the assignment image! =P
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nstam/2367710379/
Nice! I like it! :thumb

[OffTopic]

OK, despite that fact that I am twice the age of that last model (:rofl, - beautiful shot nstam) I was determined to figure this one out and I just didn't think that soft candlelight is right for my husband's face. And I decided to try it the really tough way - in a completely dark room with nothing but candlelight. Wow, this was a toughie, especially on a (ahem) mature face. Six sittings and 48 photos later (do I look frustrated or bored?), here's what I finally got Nikolai -

http://www.careyphoto.com/photos/273543906_RhLNe-M-1.jpg


ISO 400
f/2.8
1/15
link (http://www.careyphoto.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=273543906&ImageKey=RhLNe) to exif


Yeah comp is a bit off - I really hate doing sp's


Little hint for anyone else trying this on a face that has lived a little bit of life, a reflector under the chin (on the table, in the lap) does wonders to combat the effects of gravity. :D

http://www.careyphoto.com/gallery/3067533_URWZi#273543906_RhLNe-A-LB

[nstam]

OK, despite that fact that I am twice the age of that last model (:rofl, - beautiful shot nstam) I was determined to figure this one out and I just didn't think that soft candlelight is right for my husband's face. And I decided to try it the really tough way - in a completely dark room with nothing but candlelight. Wow, this was a toughie, especially on a (ahem) mature face. Six sittings and 48 photos later (do I look frustrated or bored?), here's what I finally got Nikolai -



ISO 400
f/2.8
1/15
link (http://www.careyphoto.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=273543906&ImageKey=RhLNe) to exif


Yeah comp is a bit off - I really hate doing sp's


Little hint for anyone else trying this on a face that has lived a little bit of life, a reflector under the chin (on the table, in the lap) does wonders to combat the effects of gravity. :D

http://www.careyphoto.com/gallery/3067533_URWZi#273543906_RhLNe-A-LB
i shot completely in the dark too... but i was under control, and i kind knew what i was doing! (maybe your husband didnt?) it was alot of meticulus focusing under such lowlight...
i believe there was close to thirty shots that i took... i had put a different picture up, but the previous was more artistic than portrait.

thank you for your kind words, and a great entry! i love it!
~n8

[OffTopic]

i shot completely in the dark too... but i was under control, and i kind knew what i was doing! (maybe your husband didnt?) it was alot of meticulus focusing under such lowlight...
i believe there was close to thirty shots that i took... i had put a different picture up, but the previous was more artistic than portrait.

thank you for your kind words, and a great entry! i love it!
~n8

Thanks nstam, but hubby wasn't around and doesn't know the first thing about cameras anyways; I did this myself with a remote (kinda tough when you can't see what the viewfinder sees). If I was smart I would've put a mirror behind the camera so I could at least see the lighting.

And I am never in control! :lol3

Saw your previous pic before you changed it and liked it too.

[nstam]

my 70-300 hunted alot during autofocus! i did some pre shots where i focus on something that looked at the same distance-ish while my lady got ready. i believe my problem was the fact that it was constrained to f5.6

youre to hard on yourself with the shes much younger than you! you look great! (not hitting on you lol)

[Nikolai]

OK, despite that fact that I am twice the age of that last model (:rofl, - beautiful shot nstam) I was determined to figure this one out and I just didn't think that soft candlelight is right for my husband's face. And I decided to try it the really tough way - in a completely dark room with nothing but candlelight. Wow, this was a toughie, especially on a (ahem) mature face. Six sittings and 48 photos later (do I look frustrated or bored?), here's what I finally got Nikolai -

Yeah comp is a bit off - I really hate doing sp's

Little hint for anyone else trying this on a face that has lived a little bit of life, a reflector under the chin (on the table, in the lap) does wonders to combat the effects of gravity. :D


Lori, thank you very much! Nice entry!
I wonder how many candles did you have and how far were they? In my preferred scenario - several candles 1-2 ft from the face - anything behind the subject (you in this case:-) further than 2-3 feet should have been pitch black. :scratch

[OffTopic]

Lori, thank you very much! Nice entry!
I wonder how many candles did you have and how far were they? In my preferred scenario - several candles 1-2 ft from the face - anything behind the subject (you in this case:-) further than 2-3 feet should have been pitch black. :scratch

Thanks Nikolai! I had five candles on my left (camera right) at face level about 1 foot away, two candles on my right about two feet away, and the reflector angled in my lap to bounce the light from my left under my chin. Took me a few tries to realize I needed to get the light up higher and then the right ratio to create the look I wanted.

You caught that flower arrangement behind my head, huh? Since it was mid-day I was shooting in the garage and I was too lazy to remove that from the countertop after hauling all my gear out there and moving everything around and stacking boxes to get the candles at the right height. I was lazy, I admit it. The flowers didn't show in the first test photos, so I figured I was good, but I think the angle I had the reflector in that shot is what caught it because it was only about a foot or so behind my head. Rather than reshoot for the umpteenth time I thought about burning it in or cloning to remove it...but I guess I really should've moved the flowers and reshot, but after looking at almost 50 hideous photos of myself over one night and the next day, I just didn't have it in me. :huh I don't like to make nice to the camera...like most photographers I much prefer being behind the camera. I promise I won't be so lazy next time.

Better yet, maybe I'll convince hubby to do a couples sitting with me so I can try to figure out how to light two faces with candlelight without getting any horrible shadows and resubmit. :D

[NateWagner]

well, I have been meaning to try this candlelit portrait for some time now, and tonight I finally did it, taking pictures of my beautiful wife.
Anyway, I know that a new assignment is going on now, but if y'all would be willing to give me feedback on this I would really appreciate it.

This was taken with my sigma 18-50 2.8 at 2.8 1/8th of a second.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2252/2391508610_72fdc6b42c.jpg?v=0

the picture on my computer is has a bit more of an orangeish tint from the candles, however when I uploaded it that disappeared (unfortunately). Maybe it's cause it's for the web, I dunno.

Nate

[Nikolai]

well, I have been meaning to try this candlelit portrait for some time now, and tonight I finally did it, taking pictures of my beautiful wife.
Anyway, I know that a new assignment is going on now, but if y'all would be willing to give me feedback on this I would really appreciate it.

This was taken with my sigma 18-50 2.8 at 2.8 1/8th of a second.

the picture on my computer is has a bit more of an orangeish tint from the candles, however when I uploaded it that disappeared (unfortunately). Maybe it's cause it's for the web, I dunno.

Nate
Nate,
thank you for the entry! :thumb
I must say, it's still quite orange:-), I think bit of white balancing could help :-)

[NateWagner]

so it's too orange? I mean, it seemed that the candles naturally caused more of that tint. I can do more with white balancing and saturation etc to drop that some more, but I thought it was supposed to be more of that because of the candles.

[Nikolai]

so it's too orange? I mean, it seemed that the candles naturally caused more of that tint. I can do more with white balancing and saturation etc to drop that some more, but I thought it was supposed to be more of that because of the candles.
A little, yes, but not that far... Of course, it's all a matter of personal taste and if you like it this way - so be it, it's your picture..:dunno

[NateWagner]

beyond the tint/coloring, are there other suggestions y'all would make on the photo?

[Nikolai]

beyond the tint/coloring, are there other suggestions y'all would make on the photo?
One of the things I like the most about the candles is their weakness as a ligth source. I mean, they usually are capable of creating very dramatic shadows.
In this case, however, you seem to have too many of them, shadows are virtually non-existent...:dunno

[NateWagner]

ok, I took a different photo from the "session" and I played around with that a bit. Is this an improvement towards what you would suggest, or...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2306/2393151915_dc81bc928e.jpg?v=0

thanks,
Nate

[Nikolai]

ok, I took a different photo from the "session" and I played around with that a bit. Is this an improvement towards what you would suggest, or...

thanks,
Nate
Yes, definitely, a big one! :thumb

[exploderpilot]

This was pretty difficult! Mine is still uploading.....used an 18-55 kit lens because that's all that was in the house. It's a little dark, but I like it.
Edit: Here ya go.....
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c134/exploderpilot23/AngelicaCandlelightPortrait037.jpg

[exploderpilot]

Oh the noise! It definitely did not look like that in photoshop.......

[Nikolai]

This was pretty difficult! Mine is still uploading.....used an 18-55 kit lens because that's all that was in the house. It's a little dark, but I like it.
Edit: Here ya go.....

Thank you! :thumb
Too bad she has her eyes closed:dunno , it's a great effect when you see the candle's catchlight in the eyes...:deal

[Antonio Correia]

http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/photos/276817758_C7xq9-L.jpg

Any good ?
I don't like my own shadow on the wall. I should repeat the picture further away but it gives me too much work.:wink
May be a better table, more reading type table.
May be I should remove the furniture in the back...
Oh well ... I could do it. It's a self portrait BMW.:D

[Nikolai]

Any good ?
I don't like my own shadow on the wall. I should repeat the picture further away but it gives me too much work.:wink
May be a better table, more reading type table.
May be I should remove the furniture in the back...
Oh well ... I could do it. It's a self portrait BMW.:D

Antonio, unless you told us I would have never guessed this is a candlelit portrait :scratch Looks more like table lamp lit... Maybe even some flash...
Here's an idea: get no more than 3 candles (just one is fine) and put them very close to your face, no further than 50 cm. Also, try to do it at night or in a darkroom with no other light present. No need for backlighting or other fancy effects, all we need is a simple, clean candleit portrait that looks like it candelit :wink

[Antonio Correia]

Antonio, unless you told us I would have never guessed this is a candlelit portrait :scratch Looks more like table lamp lit... Maybe even some flash...
Here's an idea: get no more than 3 candles (just one is fine) and put them very close to your face, no further than 50 cm. Also, try to do it at night or in a darkroom with no other light present. No need for backlighting or other fancy effects, all we need is a simple, clean candleit portrait that looks like it candelit :wink
Nikolai,
This is in fact a candlelit portrait. No lights in the room, no flash.
The candles were bare, the one in the back and the one to our left.
I shot with the tripod and the result is so amazing as the one with full moon which you will remember and where I shot myself (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=72936&page=12).
I was very quiet (not moving) for some moments as the shot took 6 seconds long (EXIF (http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=276817758&ImageKey=C7xq9)).
In fact I made 4 shots and took this one.

Someone wiser than myself would have made a better work in CS3.
I have used Shadow/hightlight and a blue filter to correct the orange cast.
Previously I had also corrected the WB in the raw file.

I think I have done what you asked, or have I missed something ?
" This challenge is about a portrait in candle light - or at least in what appears to be a candle light. :wink
No additional visible light source or the evidence of thereof should be present.
Humans only please."

I think you never expected such a good candlelit picture.:wink
I am very modest these days.:rofl

I have been looking carefully around and I can see that I am a better photographer than many professionals. And I am also obviously beaten by others far better than myself.
I am serious. I mean this. I am self convinced. Show me the opposite.

In terms of composition I am sure of what I do. I can argue with many people about many photography subjects.
However I am aware that I am ignorant in the photography subject as in many many others. There are so many things to know, that my knowledge will ever be 1/10...0 of the whole.
:bow:D:thumb

[Nikolai]

Mikolai,
This is in fact a candlelit portrait. No lights in the room, no flash.
...
Antonio, I don't know what to tell you. It does not look like a candlelit portrait to me. :dunno
I think you're overcomplicating things. It should not be that hard. Set your camera on a tripod, boost the ISO to 3200, place ONE candle close to your face and shoot in AE mode at f/4 or faster. It's that easy. Good luck! :thumb

[ulrikft]

Does portraits of weiss bier count? :P

http://ulrikft.smugmug.com/photos/277474793_PVnde-L.jpg

[Antonio Correia]

Antonio, I don't know what to tell you. It does not look like a candlelit portrait to me. :dunno
I think you're overcomplicating things. It should not be that hard. Set your camera on a tripod, boost the ISO to 3200, place ONE candle close to your face and shoot in AE mode at f/4 or faster. It's that easy. Good luck! :thumb
If I am on the mood today, at home and at night I will reproduce the scenario for you to see.
But ... a portrait with one candle only ?
I thought that "...This challenge is about a portrait in candle light - or at least in what appears to be a candle light. :wink..."

OK I used 2. Was is forbiden ? Have I missunderstood ?
Portuguese reading English, you know ... :bash

What am I missing here ?:dunno

Let's forget the incident shall we ?
I will do that d... photo tonight:D:thumb

[Nikolai]

Does portraits of weiss bier count? :P

Thanks!
It breaks a couple of rules - daylight on the background, main subject is not human, but the main lighting is nice!:thumb

[Nikolai]

I thought that "...This challenge is about a portrait in candle light - or at least in what appears to be a candle light. :wink..."
OK I used 2. Was is forbiden ? Have I missunderstood ?
What am I missing here ?:dunno

As I said earlier, your entry, unlike all others, does NOT appear to be taken with a candlelight. But may be it's just me :dunno

[nstam]

As I said earlier, your entry, unlike all others, does NOT appear to be taken with a candlelight. But may be it's just me :dunno
im on the same boat as nikolai. i didnt want to jump on that image, but in the slight chance it is candle light ill throw in my two pennies(i highly debate candle usage here, the book pages are way too sharp for 6 secs)

the lightining behind the subject is extremely harsh. and to top it off, the shadow still follows through the extreme lighting... meaning the shadows light is very strong! the reflection of the eye looks like one main source! a bright source!

if this is candle light, please post the original... with orange tones! candle light is going to be way off of what photoshop wants the levels to be!

lets see the original!

[nstam]

(nt)

[Antonio Correia]

... if this is candle light, please post the original... with orange tones! candle light is going to be way off of what photoshop wants the levels to be! lets see the original!

I will post not only the original from raw without modifications, but also the scenario of the set-up.
:D:thumb

[Nikolai]

(nt)
Nathan, thank you! :thumb
I would crop out the top part and maybe played with levels beyou auto mode to dim the noise..

[Antonio Correia]

I just arrived home and here is the picture.
Because the photo has been shot in the dinning room and I am going to dine now, I will post later the scenario of the hole picture.
Look at the time the photo was taken in the clock and check with the EXIF if you wish.

From RAW file "As shot" and "Default"

http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/photos/277630772_E2ACV-L.jpg

[Antonio Correia]

Here am I again.
I have just shot the picture with the same setting (on camera) than before.
EXIF for this one (http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=277693411&ImageKey=G5R5a)
Yes. You are right in one point: I used three candles and not two. I forgot to mention it. It is so small and has so little light ... I mean the red candle near the reflector.
In fact the reflector is nothing but a piece of white card.

And yes again I was not able to reproduce the exact parameters I have used for the first time.
May be with more time and patience I could do it again.

Well what do you have to say now, please ? :wink

http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/photos/277693411_G5R5a-L.jpg

I almost forgot: there is a fourth light without any influence: the one on the glass of the window at far right.

[Nikolai]

Here am I again.
...
Thank you for the repost.
I can clearly what the issue was/is: the candles are *extremely* far away from you. As I said several times already, for this type of shooting it's NOT recommended to have the candle(s) furhter than 50 cm (< 2ft) from the face.

[Antonio Correia]

Thank you for the repost.
I can clearly what the issue was/is: the candles are *extremely* far away from you. As I said several times already, for this type of shooting it's NOT recommended to have the candle(s) furhter than 50 cm (< 2ft) from the face.

Nikolai,
As you see or can imagine I was not in this last picture in the same position as I was in the first picture.
Confusing. I am set at a chair in the last picture which is not the same as before.
I am going to measure the distance I was from the left candle at the time of the first picture. I can guess I was in fact some 50 cms away.
The issue is that that candle is very bright and the piece that burns - you understand - is very long and has been burning before. This is the reason why it gives such a long and vertical flame.
When candles are new they have smaller lights ...

The other candle, the one in the back, is similar to the left one but smaller.
Thank you Nikolai. :D:bow
:thumb

[Antonio Correia]

I just arrived home and I have measured the distances.
Both are 50 cms and 55 cms, referring to the first submitted photo
:bow:D:thumb

[Nikolai]

I just arrived home and I have measured the distances.
Both are 50 cms and 55 cms, referring to the first submitted photo
:bow:D:thumb
I don't know :dunno These were guidelines, not rules. I don't like the original entry, it's not what I had in mind.
I suggest we move onto the next one...

[Antonio Correia]

I don't know :dunno These were guidelines, not rules. I don't like the original entry, it's not what I had in mind.
I suggest we move onto the next one...

I am sorry you don't like my picture because I do and I consider it a good one.

I couldn't understand what you had in mind. :cry

Let's move on. :thumb

We can't please everyone, can we ?:wink

[sanaka]

Ok, here's my candlelit SP. Of course I shot before rereading the thread :rolleyes I could've probably done better with everyone's discussion fresh in mind!

http://sanaka.smugmug.com/photos/282059601_ExNUo-XL.jpg

I used 5 candles about 2 ft. away, at lap height sitting down. Noise at high ISO is totally brutal on my camera, so I'm resting on a pillow because apparently I'm just like my kids and can NOT stay still on my own for 3 seconds! Also, I'm still learning my way around CS3 and couldn't find the eyebrow plucker tool :huh

exif (http://sanaka.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=282059601&ImageKey=ExNUo)


Peace,
Sanaka

[Nikolai]

Ok, here's my candlelit SP. Of course I shot before rereading the thread :rolleyes I could've probably done better with everyone's discussion fresh in mind!

I used 5 candles about 2 ft. away, at lap height sitting down. Noise at high ISO is totally brutal on my camera, so I'm resting on a pillow because apparently I'm just like my kids and can NOT stay still on my own for 3 seconds! Also, I'm still learning my way around CS3 and couldn't find the eyebrow plucker tool :huh

exif (http://sanaka.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=282059601&ImageKey=ExNUo)


Peace,
Sanaka

Sanaka, thank you, nice entry! :thumb

[eL eSs Vee]

My first entry:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb171/MrNewportCustom/Martti-Candlelit.jpg

Post precessing includes the usual sharpening and levels, et al., plus grain texture, very mild gausian blur and a vignette.

EXIF:
Nikon D40X
2008/04/26 19:28:49.6
Compressed RAW (12-bit)
Image Size: Large (3872 x 2592)
Color
Lens: 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 G
Focal Length: 65mm
Exposure Mode: Manual
Metering Mode: Multi-Pattern
1/3 sec - F/5.6
Exposure Comp.: -1.3 EV
Sensitivity: ISO 1600

Set-up:
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb171/MrNewportCustom/Candlelit-set-up-shot.jpg

The set-up shot was taken early. For the image above, the candles and the reflector were reversed. House lights were on, but dimmed to very low. Unfortunately, not low enough. Hence the vignette.

[eL eSs Vee]

We then went out on the balcony and had a little fun creating a vintage horror movie scene. (But in color?) This one is not intended for the assignment, because the setting sun played a too-big role. I just wanted to show it. :D

The picture taken a moment later startled the neighbors. :rofl
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb171/MrNewportCustom/Martti-with-Candles.jpg

Yes, she eventually got wax on her hand. Ouch!

[Nikolai]

My first entry:

Post precessing includes the usual sharpening and levels, et al., plus grain texture, very mild gausian blur and a vignette.

The set-up shot was taken early. For the image above, the candles and the reflector were reversed. House lights were on, but dimmed to very low. Unfortunately, not low enough. Hence the vignette.

It's an insteresting picture, but I'm afraid with all the pp enhacements and technicalities it lost the original feeling I'm sure it had at some point. I look at this image and I cannot get past the tons of noise and an extremely low dynamic range :dunno

[eL eSs Vee]

It's an insteresting picture, but I'm afraid with all the pp enhacements and technicalities it lost the original feeling I'm sure it had at some point. I look at this image and I cannot get past the tons of noise and an extremely low dynamic range :dunno

I understand your point completely, Nikolai. As you can see in the EXIF, exposure compensation was at -1.3. I'd failed to set it to less compensation and underexposed the shots. I didn't notice my error until I got home and saw it in the EXIF. :cry

Regarding the noise, underexposing at ISO 1600 has that unfortunate effect. I'm sure I would have done better by exposing properly. I don't have a recent enough version of Photoshop to reduce the noise, and I'd forgotten to turn it on in-camera - I should have done at least that - so I added film grain and a slight gausian blur. It worked a little. A little too little. The low dinamic range you see is the best I could get without it looking over-processed. Believe me, I tried.

Thank you, Nikolai.

[cmr164]

Not quite Candlelight... I had a flat tire and stopped to have the vulcanizer repair the tube. He has a press made out of pistons and he buids a fire in the top most to provide the heat for the vulcanizing process.

http://www.iisc.com/pics/misc/vulcan_070614.jpg

[Paul Iddon]

I was prompted to add this one by Ian Clark.

First post is a crop, the second below the full image.



http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn206/pauliddon001/shanonsquare.jpg


Paul.

[Paul Iddon]

Now the original photo:

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn206/pauliddon001/shannonphoto.jpg



Paul.

[Nikolai]

I was prompted to add this one by Ian Clark.
First post is a crop, the second below the full image.
Paul.
Paul,
thank you! :thumb
It's a great setup, however I do feel that:

1) bw treatment steals from the image instead of adding to it. The warmth of candle light is totally gone and it's "just a portrait under some relatively harsh light"
2) In general the image seems overly soft in some artificial way (oveprocessed)

:dunno

[hoffalady]

first attempt... sitting on the floor of my closet...

http://hoffalady.smugmug.com/photos/338720073_WxcS9-L.jpg

[Nikolai]

first attempt... sitting on the floor of my closet...

Welcome to the Class and thank you for your entry! :thumb
I like the use of a little diffuser! I think it would be even better if you hold it just a little bit further away from the face and a bit higher...

[hoffalady]

thanks for the welcome, Nikolai!

i think a couple more candles would have helped it as well.... maybe next time... :thumb