Adam Ambruso

[24Peter]

From a shoot last week, again fighting the Los Angeles mid-day summer sun. We did the best we could... :) See all the pics here: http://imageevent.com/24peter/adamambruso

1. http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/adamambruso/large/IMG_1913.JPG

2. http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/adamambruso/large/IMG_1701.JPG

3. http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/adamambruso/large/IMG_1726.JPG

4. http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/adamambruso/large/IMG_1858.JPG

5. http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/adamambruso/large/IMG_1878.JPG

6. http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/adamambruso/large/IMG_1982.JPG

[aparmley]

Numbers 3 & 4 are pretty killer Pete! I'll have to check out the full gallery a little later. Image quality again is very nice.

[JTL]

You didn't want to see him a swinsuit? :D

[24Peter]

You didn't want to see him a swinsuit? :D
Dude - I know what you want... but it's gonna be another couple weeks before those shots are ready.;) In the meantime, cute the brother some slack... :rolleyes:

[24Peter]

Numbers 3 & 4 are pretty killer Pete! I'll have to check out the full gallery a little later. Image quality again is very nice.
Thanks Andy! :)

[rawpaw18]

The fourth one I like, but three the background seems a little distracting to me. Seems like too much going on back there, my eye wants to go to the right. Could just be my lazy eye:rolleyes:. Looks like a good job with the lighting again.

Hope you don't mind me posting over here in Canon land but I learn quite a bit from you guys.

[24Peter]

The fourth one I like, but three the background seems a little distracting to me. Seems like too much going on back there, my eye wants to go to the right. Could just be my lazy eye:rolleyes:. Looks like a good job with the lighting again.
Well it's a real interesting building behind him - the Frank Gerhy (sp?) designed Disney Concert Hall. It's got aluminum/steel skin creating all kinds of interesting patterns and reflecting all kinds of light. That day is was so hot and the metallic surfaces of the building made it like being in the middle of a giant sun reflector. :eek: But it does make for a muddled background at times.

Hope you don't mind me posting over here in Canon land but I learn quite a bit from you guys.
Can't speak for anyone else but I don't mind. In fact I'll take whatever feedback I can get esp. since there seems to be much less interest when I post photos of guys than bikini-clad gals. :rolleyes:

[cdifoto]

Nice work Pete. Excellent job harnessing that sunlight!

[aparmley]

Pete I'm trying to figure out if in #3 you have too much head room and too much "Waist" below the hands. . .? I'm thinking a slightly tighter crop would make that stronger?

Just a thought - maybe you already tried it. . ??

[24Peter]

Pete I'm trying to figure out if in #3 you have too much head room and too much "Waist" below the hands. . .? I'm thinking a slightly tighter crop would make that stronger?

Just a thought - maybe you already tried it. . ??
Compositionally #3 is off but after playing with around with different crops I kind of liked the "off" feeling for that one. The thing for me about that shot is the light on the left side of his face. That was totally reflected light. A little extreme yes, but it just came up in the moment. Another photographer stopped as we were taking those shots and was bummed he didn't have anyone to place in that spot.

The biggest challenge to shooting mid-day with the bright overhead sun, was the dark suits and his fair skin color. There was just no way to camera could properly expose both. So, hopefully lesson learned and that will be my last time shooting outside at that time of day during that time of the year (the winter sun is much lower mid-day).

Course the other challenge of shooting in front of a landmark buidling in Los Angeles is the security guards. We managed to sweet talk the first two but by the time the third showed up I had my 70-200 F4 L on the camera with the hood and she knew we weren't some tourists from St. Louis (sorry Andy :D) taking snaps to send back home. We were "hasta la vista baby" at that point anyway though since the reflected sun was hot and blinding. But it's a great building and "I'll be back..." :eek:

[aparmley]

Pete - I see what your saying - Thats cool. It certainly wasn't a critique per say, just a thought you know - I know I like to try different crops to get a feel for what we can do with an image - hence my wondering. . .

Do you have a raw - oh wait - never mind . . . I would to have liked to play with the raw file for that image - bring the exposure down for the suit, convert, bring the exposure where it should be fore skin - convert, layermask the skin into the properly exposued suit shot . . . voila! =) I'm telling you dude - Let me crash at your place for week [never been to Cali] and assist for the next model shoot and I'll show you the way of the RAW. ;) LOL - nah, I'm no expert - but it was worth a shot! :D

Let me ask you this - The model's fair skin and all - knowing that the camera is going to overexpose a dark suit and knowing that Camera would underexpose his fair skin - How different do you feel the exposure for his skin and the correct on for his suit would be?

I know its always tricky to get white shirts and dark tuxes exposed properly - Because of the required DR - But I kinda hope that your explanation of it maybe triggers a different thought pattern for me - I tend to look at exposures the same way - and seeing that its my weak point right now, I need to figure out how to gauge the most accurate exposure for a given subject.

[24Peter]

I'm telling you dude - Let me crash at your place for week [never been to Cali] and assist for the next model shoot and I'll show you the way of the RAW. ;) LOL - nah, I'm no expert - but it was worth a shot! :D
Well I'm doing a bikini shoot with Julie Sunday at 5PM, so if you can get to LA before then... ;)

I know its always tricky to get white shirts and dark tuxes exposed properly - Because of the required DR - But I kinda hope that your explanation of it maybe triggers a different thought pattern for me - I tend to look at exposures the same way - and seeing that its my weak point right now, I need to figure out how to gauge the most accurate exposure for a given subject.
Well it's real simple actually but I wasn't conscious enough to do it on this shoot: dark suit, fair skin, under expose by a stop or so. White sand or snow, over expose by a stop. The camera seeks that 18% grey value and assigns it to whatever it thinks is in the middle of the exposure range. That's why most cameras make white snow grey for instance.

As for the whole RAW thing, I'm still not convinced it's worth the effort. I never say never, but right now I prefer my images cooked. :D

[aparmley]

Well I'm doing a bikini shoot with Julie Sunday at 5PM, so if you can get to LA before then... ;)


Well it's real simple actually but I wasn't conscious enough to do it on this shoot: dark suit, fair skin, under expose by a stop or so. White sand or snow, over expose by a stop. The camera seeks that 18% grey value and assigns it to whatever it thinks is in the middle of the exposure range. That's why most cameras make white snow grey for instance.

As for the whole RAW thing, I'm still not convinced it's worth the effort. I never say never, but right now I prefer my images cooked. :D

I try to remind myself about the whole bring black and white to grey exposure of the camera but I find its difficult to quickly and accurately decide what the camera is using for its basis for metering. . . I have to admit - I have read the difference in the meter modes about 1000 times - but then when I set up for a shot and use all the different meter modes - the camera usually will vary its exposure by maybe 1/3 of stop in shutter speed [shooting in AV] if that - most of them are the same . . . . I know when I have a dark object that fills most of the frame what its going to do, I know when I have a light object in most of the frame what the camera is going to do - its just when I don't have a majority of one shade in the frame - How do we know what the camera decides to expose for - Definitely showing my inexperience here. . . but I've attempted this enough times to know tha the only way to be sure what the camera is metering for is to take a general meter - then scoot in and meter the subject and see what the difference is - we can't always do that.

I don't know . . . I suppose its time for me to reread Understanding Exposure. . . LMAO!