My last couple of threads hasn't generated much interest so maybe I need to double the ante.

I rarely get to shoot dual models but Kelana surprised me by bringing Jessica along for her shoot. Rarely have I been so lucky to be surprised.



2.


3.


4.


5.


6.

sorry, boss.. not feeling these..
great exposures, not too bad looking models.. but not feeling it.

BRING CINDY BACK!

To my eye, FWIW...

Three is the strongest of the set. I like it.

1. Light on the girl on right is nice, the one on left looks a bit flat but not bad. Also, did she have a stomach ache or an appendix issue? Like the framing, body positions and scene though.

2. Like the high key type light. Did girl on right get stung on the arm by a mosquito just as you were taking the picture? The back of the mosquito slapping hand kind of turns me off too. Not wild about the horizon through the heads.

3. I like.

4. Not sure why, but it's just eh.

5. Don't like the hands or the way the legs get all mixed up together.

6. Kind of a neat pose, I like that, exposure and light are good too, but there isn't any engagement with me on the expressions.

My initial opinions for what they're worth...

Direction of light is there and exposures are great but they seem to lack impact. They seem lost in the frame to me. Sorry I can't be more specific. Maybe they need some close ups. Do feel six has the beginnings of being interesting.

Thanks guys.

I appreciate the comments on the light and exposure. I've started moving all my shoots to evening hours and it is SOOOO much less work in post processing.

Bryce (and Hack) your opinions are always worth quite a bit.

Fouques, you KNOW I'd give my right arm and a couple of toes to get Cindy back.

my 2 cents has no reflection on your job, it is with the models. I don't think it was your intention but the wardrobe and the general vibe I get here is upper class street walkers. The shoe/boot on model on right pretty much cinches that for me. The swim suits were the best and much much better sans shoes. I'd like to see more of the black and white suit, interesting and fashion worthy enough to add and not subtract from image.

HEYYYY VacaMon, great to have you commenting again.

To be dead honest, I agree with you on wardrobe. Kelana considers herself a designer/stylist and she was dressing both herself and Jessica. To me, most of the wardrobe was butt ugly but I make a big deal on Mayhem out of saying I have no wardrobe requirements (ie: I don't require little skimpy bikinis to be interested in a model). Sometimes this policy bites me in the derriere. LOL

Hack, not an excuse but I also agree that they aren't always the star of the frame. Part of the objective of the shoot was to have NYC in the background and, while we accomplished that, it does take away from the models themselves. It turns out that Kelana wanted more of a catalogue shoot than a typical model portfolio shoot. Since I'm a totally TF shooter, I think she was able to scam a design product shoot from me.

For me, 5 & 6 are closest to my usual style.

Anyway, I'll post a few of their individual frames in another thread in a couple of days.

Originally Posted by JohnGalt_ny HEYYYY VacaMon, great to have you commenting again. To be dead honest, I agree with you on wardrobe. Kelana considers herself a designer/stylist and she was dressing both herself and Jessica. To me, most of the wardrobe was butt ugly but I make a big deal on Mayhem out of saying I have no wardrobe requirements (ie: I don't require little skimpy bikinis to be interested in a model). Sometimes this policy bites me in the derriere. LOL Hack, not an excuse but I also agree that they aren't always the star of the frame. Part of the objective of the shoot was to have NYC in the background and, while we accomplished that, it does take away from the models themselves. It turns out that Kelana wanted more of a catalogue shoot than a typical model portfolio shoot. Since I'm a totally TF shooter, I think she was able to scam a design product shoot from me. For me, 5 & 6 are closest to my usual style. Anyway, I'll post a few of their individual frames in another thread in a couple of days.

There comes a time when TF becomes taking advantage of. If she starts to use these for promotional purposes for a business other than her own personal modeling, she should pay you or take them off.

Agreed in principle Jon but I won't be tracking down her site and it's more hassle than it's worth to me.

Honestly, Kelana is really beautiful BUT severely one dimensional. I tried everything I knew to coach any different expression from her and always got this face which, pretty as it is, gets boring over 200 clicks:



I doubt I'm gonna chase her to work again.

Part of the objective of the shoot was to have NYC in the background

Then do that. Before I saw your comment above I was thinking, "He's got the skyline - why isn't he using THAT?!"

I don't want rocks.
I don't want greenery.
I want that famous skyline and two lovely ladies! You're on the right track IMO in #1; I like the bridge pylon too. In 3&4 I was wondering if you were back further up-river, since it doesn't look specifically like NYC the way that first shot which incorporates the skyline does.

One thing you see a LOT in NY actor/musician headshots is how they use the city. Check out the work of a photographer called Dario Acosta. Annoyingly, his online portfolio doesn't include his very NY-centric shots that often are on the cover of Opera News and other magazines (although they are major kick-a** portraits!). Here's one he did for an ON piece about a friend of mine, which gives you a hint of what I'm talking about. He often shoots the ladies outside on a rooftop with the skyline in the background, sometimes he does ones on the NJ side of the river etc etc.

Obviously, those are a different kind of portrait, but I think they offer a lot to study and incorporate into your own style

Btw, one other thing to consider might have been to underexpose the ambient a little more and gone with hard directional light on them. Since you were shooting in the evening (YES!), you can get some great effects if you position your lights right and incorporate the long shadows of the sun itself as an extra "light".

PS I actually really like 5&6 photographically and as far as body poses; it's only their facial expressions which make them a bit "meh". Like the water and the light, though

Hi Diva,

Good to see a lot of my friends and commenters returning.

If you want more of the skyline ( including a few in landscape) go see their gallery at my Zenfolio site.

Numbers 3&4 are about 3 miles upriver and that area in the BKG is a landmark called Spuyten Duyvil. That bridge connects the Bronx with Manhattan.

I also think they are both beautiful but neither has great range. It made for a more difficult shoot, especially for 4 looks each.

BTW Acosta likes to shoot from Hoboken, NJ directly across the Hudson from lower Manhattan.

Lastly, I've been moving all my shoots to evening light. There's no flash in any of these. Tis all Mr. Sun at very low angles.

Sounds like it was challenging shoot. Welcome to shooting multiple models! I'd like to see a little better posing with two girls. Back to back seems to work well with these two but also think outside the box. What about one girl lying down or both lying down or walking or something like that? That said, I know from experience it's a lot tougher posing two models than one!

Thanks for having the courage to keep posting. It's been fun watching your progress.

Thanks for the ideas Dogwood. Maybe next time.

I don't mind being the pinata for others to learn from and this site has definitely improved my shoots over the past year.

A lot has already been said except for this...

Those shoes that Asian gal is wearing in shots 2-4 are freaking hideous. Sorry. I can't help but say it. It's not my fault. I blame it on having a with a wife that is a total shoe whore.

You aren't insulting me at all Alex. The exposure and color are good enough that you know they're hideous.

I usually leave wardrobe up to the models and Kelana says she is a designer/stylist.
All I know is pushing buttons (oocasionally the correct ones) so I take no blame for those shoes.

What, Alex, you don't like 5" heel peeptoe laceup boots in a sickly-tobacco shade? I mean seriously. No taste at all (tell your wife I approve heartily. 'Course, I was given the shoe-whore gene, but crappy and weird-sized feet to go with it. Irony much? SO not fair. But I digress.... ;)

Originally Posted by divamum What, Alex, you don't like 5" heel peeptoe laceup boots in a sickly-tobacco shade? I mean seriously. No taste at all (tell your wife I approve heartily. 'Course, I was given the shoe-whore gene, but crappy and weird-sized feet to go with it. Irony much? SO not fair. But I digress.... ;)

The shoe is just plain bad. But it looks even worse on this gal. I mean she is the epitome of petite, yet she is wearing the clunkiest shoe I've ever seen in my life. It's just completely out of scale. TBH, I don't even think they fit her feet.

Sorry again. I also just watched about 10 straight episodes of What Not to Wear with my wife so my fashion critic hat has been on all day.

As I said, I don't get to work with Stacey and Clinton so I takes what I gets.

However, in this instance I agree with you all. (Oh my God, sound the alerts)