In the spirit of Jeff Foxworthy, If your girlfriend comes home to find a naked woman on your couch, and she doesn't bat an eye, you might be a photographer.
As I mentioned, I've been jonesing to do some photography on a higher level than I've had the opportunity for lately. A friend came over last night to visit, and I convinced her to let me do some art nudes of her. I set up the photos up keeping in mind the discussions on the "improving my technical quality" thread. I meant to use both the strobes and the tripod but I found that with a fidgety model trying to use a tripod would be too impractical. I suppose I should have used my monopod, but I don't think I'm seeing too much camera blur. It was a fun set because I'd describe my friend as more classically pretty than conventionally pretty. She's six foot tall, about 190 pounds and has cerebral palsy. In other words, she's not as slim as modern American tastes dictate, but well within the preferences of "figure artists". I do need to learn a lot more about lighting, but still managed to get some acceptable photos. I am feeling the need for a larger softbox to get softer lighting, without blasting photons all over background that I may not want lit. Most of these were shot with a grid on my white lightning off stage right, with some sort of fill, from stage left. My fill light was one of those $25 strobes that you can screw into a light socket. Many of them with a softbox on it. I was going to use the strobe that the softbox actually fits, but the bulb for it got broken since I last used it. My friend wanted any pictures posted to flickr to be under "restricted access" so that only people willing to see "adult content" can see them. So I'm sorry if anyone wants to see them and doesn't have a flickr account. http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157629987056554/ I posted them at full resolution, because I'm actively seeking feedback, primarily on technical issues right now, and you can't pixel peep low-rezzed photos. Since feedback on a whole set is a lot of work so well, I'm picking this one, as my favorite, to specifically ask for critique on, but feel free to give me suggestions on any of them: standard: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/7309874796/ full resolution: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/7309874796/sizes/o K-5 DA*16-50 at 34mm ISO 80 1/160 f/8 They were all shot with the 16-50. I thought about using primes, but the 16-50 is sharp enough at f/8-16 and a lot more versatile. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
