Nicolette - Peter Marx




This was taken during a break from a portrait session. It turned out to be my favorite!

Camera:   Contax G1
Lens:   Carl Zeiss Sonnar 90mm f/2.8
Film:   Ilford FP4
Exposure:   F5.6 @ 60th Sec
Flash:  
Support:  
Filter:   none
Adjustment:   slight skin softening in Photoshop
Posted:   18-Oct-2004

Rating: 8.55 (22 ratings)

Comments

Do tell what PS action gave that skin tone

because I sure can't do it that way in 35mm.

Bob Michaels     18-Oct-2004 at 17:42

I used the NIK Dynamic Skin Softener Filter!

Peter Marx     19-Oct-2004 at 00:44

beautiful

Congratulations on a wonderful portrait. Please post some tech info on the off camera flash. What kind, exposure compensation? bounced or direct? ect. Thanks.

Gregg Humphrey     19-Oct-2004 at 12:34

Flash details

The flash used was an interfit 150 direct through a white brolly. It was placed about 2 feet behind me on my left hand side to put the right side of her face in shadow. The flash unit was on 1/2 power.

Peter Marx     19-Oct-2004 at 15:56

Nice portrait

but I find the background a bit too distracting to be a perfect shot. Is that a fan at right? Very nice nevertheless.

James Symington     20-Oct-2004 at 02:12

The fan....

Yes it's an electric fan! I have another version of the image that has the fan cloned out and the background made less distracting but I wanted to post the 'original' image rather than one that has been severely manipulated .

Peter Marx     20-Oct-2004 at 04:20

Another image

I've uploaded another image which is a tight crop of her face. This has a much less distracting background and emphasises her eyes.

Peter Marx     20-Oct-2004 at 04:39

correction

Apologies - the flash unit used was an interfit 300i

Peter Marx     20-Oct-2004 at 07:41

Thanks for the lighting info

Thanks, the lighting info really helps me in my quest to increase studio lighting knowledge.

Gregg Humphrey     20-Oct-2004 at 12:17

Thank You!

It is always nice to produce a photograph that other photographers like!

Peter Marx     20-Oct-2004 at 17:02

Peter

Just beautiful. Congrats.

Knut Skjærven     21-Oct-2004 at 06:05

-

I'm afraid I'm not as thrilled with this portrait as others. It's not that it's all that unattractive and it does have some initial zing, but the flaws overwhelm me in the end. The background is way too distracting, the darker circles of shadows under and around her eyes are very unflattering and the skin-softening effect gave her eyes a weird overly plasticky soft effect. I like the effect you had on the skin but I think just a bit more attention to distracting elements, some key lighting for the eye socket areas and more detailed application of the softening effect would have made things much better.

Richard Sintchak     22-Oct-2004 at 06:47

-

It's the foreground which is distracting ;-) I find this smoothed skin texture rather disconcerting - it jars because the rest of the girl is sharp. I would like to see a version without the softening.

Pete     22-Oct-2004 at 13:03

To smooth or not to smooth?

My goal with this picture was to make it look as if it were taken in the 1940's. I wanted a 'film noir' look to it and my decision to smooth the skin was based on the type of portrait that was popular in those times!

Peter Marx     22-Oct-2004 at 13:20