The missus just peered over my shoulder as I was looking at them so i had to come up with a crafty explanation that I was looking elsewhere.. hence the comment about the bit between her ankles.

BTW it also looks (at least on my monitor) as though an extra (vertical) black bit has been added on each side of No. 5.

My 2p.. and I really don't class myself as a great portrait artist so please take with a pinch of salt...


No.1 has "too cold" a feel to it and I don't mean just the midget-gem smuggling. The backdrop is very messy too.

No.2 is my favourite shot overall but I think that you could have done a better job with the model's hair.

No.3 has absolutely wonderful lighting on the model and a great pose but the background is far too white and bright. It looks like you may have cut-out the model and done something with the background on this one (some areas on the right are very feathered-looking) so maybe you can have another go and add a "slightly" more colourful backdrop. Interestingly I don't find the same white backdrop jarring on image 2.

No.4 is a good shot again but the same comments about the model's hair.

No.5 and No 6 irritate me immensely with the horrible cutout that has been done on the backdrop. In 5 you've missed the bit between her ankles, her shoe heel has gone AWOL and in 6 there are some very strange things going on with her hair-line.

Overall, the poses and lighting are great, good credits for that and I think you could have done much better with a bit more care and attention, particularly the backgrounds and photo-shopping have let you down on what are otherwise very respectable portraits.

If I were you I'd waste no time in having another shot with this model as she is a beautiful girl and you have the lighting skills to come up with something you can both be very proud of.

Please, please have another go.

Thanks for all the great replies folks.
I ordered the sigma 105mm from SRS and it was delivered on Wednesday. I will try post some pictures as soon as I can get some free time to play.

I don't think there is a great deal to fault here when one considers that the images probably mean a lot more to you than they will to an unconnected viewer.

The textures in the second one are particularly appealing as you have the jagged edges and sheen of wet-rock against dry. The green plant-life breaks up the grey stone well and gives some good contrast. I think that you could really come up with some good graphic images here if you keep at it.

Keep going, never take any criticisms to heart and please do try out the non-auto modes. If you experiment with them then you will open up a whole new World of possibilites of controlling your own images.

Forgot all about this post but just to give it a happy ending.. I got two rolls back from the Darkroom in Cheltenham and results were very good.

Many thanks to all the above.

Tubes are a possibility but I also need the aperture ring for my film body.

cheers
ewen

Thanks guys (especially to Anvh for the images), lots of comforting and helpful posts on using a macro lens for portraiture.

For some follow-on questions.. how about:

4) What is a suitable focal length to consider given I'll be using it on digital 90% of the time and film 10%. Portraits are mostly head & shoulders, macro will be new to me.

5) The Pentax 100mm and Tamron 90mm both have aperture ring (which I think is virtually essential), but I can't determine if the Sigma 105mm does. Also the sigma has a DF (Dual Focus) system.. what is that? Is it the same as quickshift?

many thanks again

Hi folks. I'm now in the market for my first serious non-kit lens purchase and looking for some advice and recommendations.

I have A GX20 with the kit 18-55mm and 50-200mm lenses and a Tamron 70-300mm (although I hardly ever use this lens). I am looking for a macro lens that would also be suitable for the portrait range. so my questions are:

1) Is a macro lens suitable for portraiture?
I realise that a macro lenses may be considered too "sharp" and unforgiving for portraiture but I don't mind adding a little help to the sitter in photoshop or using a suitable filter if that's the case.

2) What focal length would be a good combination for portraiture and macro?
A quick web-trawl gives me offerings from Pentax (at 50 and 100mm), Tamron (at 90mm) and Sigma (50, 70, 105 and a 17-70mm zoom)

3) Any recommendations...?


My first priority is for something nice and sharp in the macro range and then the ability to use for portraiture if that's not a silly idea. As a very minor point I also use a Pentax film camera so something able to handle full-frame would be a bonus but not essential.


Kind regards to all...

Thanks for the positive comments on my "no tipping". In answer to the question from RR. I didn't run anything on the image just converted to mono with auto-grayscale and exported to JPEG from RAW.

.. an old washing machine would have been a good addition. Think I can fit one in a Lowepro 200 bag?

I also have been working on night-exposures recently. I did one at ten minutes f/8 the other day and I really liked it.




One thing that does annoy however is the darned camera takes double the exposure time to create the image.. ie you set exposure for 60 seconds, the shutter opens 60 seconds and then 60 seconds to wait for picture to be "processed" in camera. I thought I had it when I turned off the auto noise reduction on long exposures setting but it didn't seem to have any effect.. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

BTW I am using the SS GX20, so it could be possible it works differently to the K20D.