DSLRUsers.com

hi,

Not a great image, so how can I improve?
I took this shot of my housemate, it has been cropped and lightly edited in Photoshop.

I was hoping to shoot at f1/4, but unfortunately my lens may need some re-calibration.

40D + Sigma 50mm f1.4@2.8, bounce flash used.



for larger size: http://www.flickr.com/photos/iudex/3334676467/sizes/o/

Exif data is available.

I was going for a clean image, but retain his rugged features. Perhaps a little overexposed.

How do you think I went?

Thanks in advance for any critique!

I like the concept, and I have no issues with your exposure or other settings.

Perhaps, if you were to reshoot this, do something to have a slightly less distracting background, but otherwise, I think this is very nice.

Get out of the HOUSE!
I agree with Gary, apart from the background distraction(easily toned down) i think the picture is good and has great potential. The penetrating and foreboding stare may be your anchor. Darken the image to match the mood of the stare. Perhaps Vignetting of the bright background , even an overall dark sepia look that draws the viewer into that penetrating glance. I'd even play around with the eye itself, perhaps enhancing those qualities that makes it transfixing to the viewer. Could be the brightening of the highlight in the eye, changing the colour of the pupil, whitening the whites etc, etc. You could have some real fun with this. Dare i say, copyright holder willing, could make a great little competition for those with the time, energy and willingness. Create the movie poster..... The Dark Knight Exposed.
Great image great potential.
Ok, maybe i've gone over the top, i'll shut up now.
cheers
marco

I agree - love the concept - just needs a few tweaks ...
this is like a red rag to a bull, and I couldn't help myself (sorry) - I dragonized the image, and then did a few more little tweaks (dodge, further burn, and a curves adjustment), and this is what I came up with ...
If it offends, I'll remove, but I couldn't stop myself

Rel,

Very interesting treatment. While I like most of how you've done this, you've also lost some key parts of the face, where they're drifitng in to merge with the background. To me, that causes the image to become more two-dimensional; I don't get the feeling that we can see/sense the other(hidden) side of the model's face, and to me, that detracts from the original, which does provide that sense of the other side of the face just being there, without it being seen.

If that makes any sense.

Marco, please.

Gary - yep I understand - but I still had fun