On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 13:32:34 -0700, OddBALL <odd@ball.net> wrote:
>On 04 Jul 2014 17:59:51 GMT, Millard Filmore
><hibbert@jackson.county.org> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 02 Jul 2014 09:44:35 -0700, OddBALL wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:10:19 +0200, elonafan@almaty.city wrote:
>>>
>>>>IMHO white and bright background with selective focus on model makes the
>>>>pictures flat, all is bidimensional, there is no shade and light effect.
>>>>This Polina's set and previous Gabrielle set are quite perfect.
>>>>
>>>>lnfn
>>>
>>> I disagree.
>>>
>>> True admirers of the models want the best focus, color, and lighting on
>>> the model and the background is merely a distraction.
>>>
>>> But it's ok to agree to disagree.
>>
>>the color of the costume is important as well. if you follow the TTL
>>models, the sets with red clothes are the worst. maybe it is a problem
>>with the digital processing in the camera but it really does a number on
>>picture clarity. the sets before and after are crystal clear, you can
>>see every hair, every mole. so the camera is good, the models are
>>great. but the red set the skin is washed out.
>
>
>I believe it is a problem with the camera's automatic white balance.
>The red throws it off and the photographer doesn't know about white
>balance or doesn't care.
>
>Most photographers don't know about it.
>
>Here's a model with a white balance card that is used to set white
>balance perfectly with each lighting situation:
The white balance could be correct, and sure it is with the reference
card at hand, but if background is too bright, the model appears flat
on it, see Jll and Mary sets, Susie is better.
The Jane_T set is great and I'll buy it, but I am aware of that sort
of photowork are time consuming an expensive.
|
|
')){kind=link}