Second bash at Portraits

OK guys; after my first proper attempt at portraits a month or so back with the kit lens and built in flash, things have moved on in terms of my equipment. (See that thread here)

I set up my AF-500 FTZ as a slave mounted on my tripod coming from the left, and used the built in flash to trigger it.

All shots were taken with the DA*50-135 at f2.8

Please guys, any comments no matter how critical are gladly welcomed, as I am still treading very tentatively with portraits and still need to find my way.

Another quick question too - do you think i've an acceptable copy of the 50-135? I've read a fair few user reviews (though admitedly when it was first released) involving a bad copy being replaced, and I would'nt say i'm an experienced enough photographer to notice subtle flaws. It would be nice to know what you think about it's performance.

Bob have you ever looked at strobist.

They have many articles on how to get the best from one gun and basic principles of lighting using flash. It's a good read if nothing else and some of the photographs are great they also have a flick=r group.

Mike

Bob I don't think you have a bad copy of the lens, you just need more time to see how best to use it. Your portraits are not showing the lens at it's best with regard to colour and contrast.

Focus is out as well Bob did you use a tripod?

Thanks for the comments chaps.

I actually reduced the exposure in Photoshop as I wanted a moodier and atmospheric feel. Perhaps I went too far!

I didn't use a tripod I wanted to experiment with the flash being mounted on the tripod as a slave. Bad choice perhaps...

The flash is mostly yo hard I believe, don't aim at her next time but let it bounce on the wall or ceiling, much diffuser and natural light.

I never shoot portraits on a tripod, it limits you in position I believe and the shutter speed is fast enough so don't see a problem there too be honest.

Do some of you use a tripod while doing portrait?
I can see it being used though for certain kind of shots.

Formal portraits suit a tripod, as might some fine art nude images. It enables very precise focusing that doesn't waver at the point of exposure.

Generally though I would agree that a tripod can limit you.

Still on the subject of portraits - was quite happy of this one I did an hour ago of my little one...

I like that one Bob, better then the first ones you posted to be honest.

Sorry to say but the lighting is crap, and it looks as if you have a lot of dirt on your sensor, when I had my studio I used to practice with different objects on a table and play around with the lighting, now with digital it is so easy to take 100 shots until you get it right, practice makes perfect, just my take on it,
Jack.

I think so too - it's nice and sharp.

Something just clicked with me earlier with the flashgun. I'd not used it's red AF assist beam before, and I also did'nt realise it projected a nice circle, freeing me up from the viewfinder. It was fantastic when I realised this, and all my images were sharp.

I should have better results from now.

As I said, I took down the exposure a fair bit in Photoshop as I wanted something atmospheric and moody. Here is one of the shots as it was taken with no pp:




My image sensor is fine - it's the wall which I used as a backdrop that's the slight problem there.

There's no reason why harsh lighting can't be used for portraits, it all depends on the effect that you want.

I think here it's the pose and composition that needs working on in particular and the only way to do this is to keep on shooting lots of images. Photographing people is not easy, but it does improve as we go.

I'm not sure that the lighting and background gel together and I'd be very tempted to use a black background with this sort of lighting. It will be low key, very dark and heavy, but also very dramatic and this might suit her style.

Very good advice Jon - plus a black background could also give me the look I was trying to achieve. I shall take that on board!