Great photos!!! Constructive criticism for the first one…do long exposure on a tripod (which I think you did) but set your ISO at 100.

Here are some city photos from my shoot yesterday. Managed to catch the golden hour













Thoughts misc….

I prefer sharp clear portraits with bokeh rather than the vintage filter look, but I think its still like 50/50 as far as popularity goes. And on the 1st photo I was disappointed, thought she had a Phat ass, rather than the hat, lack of distinction along the brim, not sure if it's a good photo IMO or great. . .

Just my 2 cents but I'd watch your backgrounds like light poles and signs directly behind the subject's head. I realize it can be difficult when you're in the moment out on the street trying to pose the subject and negotiate traffic, pedestrians, obstacles, etc. but it's something to watch for.

I personally like more detail in the sky so I'd look to throw some flash on the subject or in a pinch use a large reflector. Having said that, letting it blow out in those backlit situations does look more natural despite the fact digital is absolute trash compared to negative film there.

re: vintage filter look BS mentioned, it's interesting how much time is spent these days in post trying to emulate the look of film — you might as well just shoot on film and be done with it.

I'm not a fan of the model always being in the center of the shot. The street sign and truck are distracting to have in the background. Move the model around in the frame and get stuff in the background to work for you.

Highlights are blown out all over the place. I agree that you need to have a reflector or flash and diffuser with you. That way you won't have to blow out highlights to get a proper exposure on the model.

I hate the vintage filter look. It destroys skin tones. Instead of glow, it's a blotchy mess that makes her look older. (Sorry. Trying to be constructive, not hating.) The photos also lack several of the characteristics of "vintage" lenses. They are lacking corner softening, vignetting, distortion, and bokeh.


I don't think it's a style that works with modern glass. A cheap vintage lens will have all the characteristics people try to emulate straight out of the camera.

Critique welcome, I would change the vape pen out for a pipe but it wasn't an option on the day, this is one of a small series.

Good point. And we're all guilty of oversharpening to please pixel peepers.

Overall I like the composition.

The biggest problem I see is that part of the left eye is in a shadow, which makes it look unnatural. It also looks like a small amount of vapor over the shadow. People are going to focus on the eyes and the lack of detail is going to be an issue.

I find that the vapor going up the side of his head is distracting and removes detail. Having a fan to gently help the vapor along might fix that.

I think a darker background would be better. I would also like to see a very small amount of fill light on the inside of his hand, tie, and left side of the nose. Those areas are darker than the background making for distracting levels of contrast. I think it would be better if the background was darker than the shadows.

I hope some of this was helpful. Good luck with your series. Make sure to come share it with us when it's complete!

Very helpful thank you, especially the second to last paragraph, those are things that i think will improve it 200% and didnt even think about.

Another recent shot


Katherine by Gary Hebding Jr. , on Flickr

Hey guys, Im the original poster of this group form years ago. Ive fallen off the misc, and photog altogether, but super glad to see this is going strong. Ive recently bought a Nikon 7200 and have been really passionate about getting back into the swing of things.


Do we have any photogs in here that reside in San Diego, CA?

What youtube channels would you guys recommend I immerse myself into to advance my skills on camera, and in LR?

Sharpness is vastly overrated. People harp on sharpness because it's the easiest lens characteristic to see. Lenses that produce better micro-contrast and color saturation make for more visually appeal images than lenses with corner to corner sharpness and no chromatic aberrations.

Marc Levoy's Lectures on Digital Photography is a good series for the technical aspect of digital photography. Though, I wouldn't put much weight into his camera, lens, or artistic opinions.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...bF1GXoCA-DA-7i



Ted Forbes (The Art of Photography) has a good series on composition. Unfortunately as of late he's gotten into the gear shilling game. Plus his ego has been growing out of control and the quality of his videos has significantly dropped.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...TwDHA00VsMzsAl



Theoria Apophasis aka the Angry Photographer makes videos that are repetitive, low production quality, and impossible to search. He calls out other YouTube photography channels for shilling and misinformation. He doesn't have affiliate links on any of his videos, which makes him pretty much the only unbiased YouTube photography gear reviewer.

https://www.youtube.com/user/kathodo...ew=0&flow=grid

Recently redid my entire website, pretty happy with it. lmk what you think brahs.

http://www.garyhebdingjr.com/

Are you using the website to get work or is it a personal website?

Love the layout, I do have a couple of issues though.

Firstly my criticism is assuming this is a business page/portfolio and not just a way of sharing images.

Contact info without clicking any links is the norm for a business page, include your email and work tel no in the upper right above the menus if possible.

Are you a motorsport photographer? are you a wedding photographer? are you a studio/portrait tog? its nearly impossible to tell as you have all the different sections in equal measure. Your pictures are all high quality but people looking for someone to hire are generally looking for a specialist in one area, best keeping your main area you work in front and centre on the home page, by all means keep the additional sections in the top right menu so people can see you arent a one trick pony and have wide ranging skills, but if you are 99% a motorsport tog and that pays the bills keep your 10 best images for your front page dedicated to motorsport rather than the 6 category pics.

I would make your bio a little less personal and a bit more to the point, its basically a thinly veiled advert. Include your name, your age (dont include age if you are young like early 20s, some idiots mistake this for inexperience) your home country/city, your current home country/city, your work experience, your published material, what sets you apart from other togs (passion, drive, artistic experience blah blah blah), your ability to travel for work, can your driving license cover you in other countries, other languages spoken etc. You want someone to be able to glance quickly through your bio and get all the info required without having to dig for it.

Interests looks fine to me overall, maybe mention to check your blog for more personal stuff etc (assuming that you update it).

Social buttons, start a fb business page, a twitter page, instagram page, maybe a flickr and ello too if you really like social media, link at least FB/Twitter/IG via social buttons on the main page.

Your work is great, and the site is too, just needs to be a little more "focused" and to the point if its for business.

A previous full(ish) moon compared to tonight's supermoon.
WOW. Such huge. So differs.

Maybe we can share some coast to coast supermoon photos? My logistics are challenging at the moment, but I may try to venture out.

In other news, I met this vet outside the VA hospital that asked if I wanted to do some photos and a video interview of him. I told him I was interested but he didn't have any details at the time. He said his spokesman would contact me later with more information.

I'm not sure how to precede with situations like this or whether its a legit organization. Maybe its a start-up?

Thing is, I've been pursuing other interest and don't even have a portfolio to show right now. I guess I'll have to play it step by step and see how it pans out.

Same. Still finding some time to mess around tho:

Come and gone here.

Didn't notice much of difference in size (of course you can always make it look larger in relation to the landscape with a longer lens) but it was extremely bright.

In the age of photoshop it's hard to get excited about a moon that's 10% larger in teh sky.

True. Photoshop is the great equalizer for planning, patience, etc. — being in the right place at the right time. Not a fan of it but it is what it is.

That extra brightness is definitely a big plus when you're relying on the moon to illuminate the landscape.

Not that noticeable when its high in the sky but check it out just as is begins to rise above the horizon just over the landscape. It was quite spectacular last night and tonight. Even morso with a little pollution thrown in for coloring. Of course it won't be as full but its as good as will get until the next supermoon in 2048. Composition vs that decisive moment? It way more exciting being up-close and personal with the moon.

Yeah. But also annoying. Bloody thing won't stay still for 2 seconds.

One last moonshot.

I've come to learn that supermoons are overrated and annoying. It just leaves you bracing for the 10,000 compositions of the exact same thing (a barely noticeable larger moon).

Plus, everytime there is a supermoon that's the largest one ever, a new largest one ever emerges a few months later. Or maybe I'm just a hater.

Urbexbrah,

Which settings did you use to shoot that girl?

Also, does anyone the best settings for shooting during cloudy days without a tripod? I'm asking this because during my last trip I tried using something like 1/30 exposure+f8 aperture+100 iso, but the pics are not as clear as they should be. What's the lowest exposure I should be using for shooting in evenings and cloudy days without a tripod?

I've noticed that pics with 200-400 iso and around 1/500 exposure were more clear. Is iso 400 fine or not?

Thanks in advance.

There are no set exposures for certain conditions, you gotta adjust depending on what kind of shot you are after.

General rule of thumb for handheld is keep your shutter speed above your focal length, ie you are using a 100mm lens you want 1/125s as your lowest shutter speed, also test different postures for hand holding your camera, with good form and an image stabilised lens you can get sharp shots at very low shutter speeds.

My process for hand held shooting is as follows:

Decide what is the lowest shutter speed to get the shot sharp > decide aperture to get desired DOF i'm after > adjust ISO to get a balanced exposure.

I'm happy to shoot up to 800 ISO, ill sacrifice aperture if really necessary to keep ISO at 800 or below.

been a while since i posted.

Single shot. Not a fan of fake moon shots and composites.

I saw it at moon rise above the city (its the relative view that matters) and it was quite astonishing. Once its above the horizon the difference is barely noticeable. You can see for yourself next supermoon in 2048. They have their place.

Recent shot


Blue Cross Blue Shield building elevator shaft - Chicago, IL by Gary Hebding Jr. , on Flickr

loving the basic white girl photoschoot

You're missing the psl mate xD