|
|
Dave Stacey
{K:150877} 3/4/2005
|
Can't add too much to what the others have said, Jim, other than I think you made a great job of this one!
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
Gilberto Santa Rosa
{K:11147} 3/4/2005
|
Great shot. Beautiful object!!!
|
|
|
|
|
James Bambery
{K:13421} 3/4/2005
|
Thanks Alison. I have other shots showing the whole bookmark as it looks. The client wanted separate pics of the bookmark both ways.Maybe I'll upload the other one at a later time.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Alison DuFlon
{K:36566} 3/4/2005
|
I think what you have taken is very beautiful, the close up for the quality of the bead is nice, but you say they are bookmarks? Maybe a small insert of the whole item along side this one. Alison
|
|
|
|
S.D Holmes
{K:7156} 3/3/2005
|
great shot mate - lovely detail and clarity!
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Spracklen
{K:32552} 3/3/2005
|
Looks like Melissa has given you some excellent advice, Jim.
Congrat's on your "first job"!
I think you only need to worry about 'overshooting' if you then use PS to airbrush out any defects.
Best regards, Chris
|
|
|
|
Judi Liosatos
{K:34047} 3/3/2005
|
You could try using a white box that has an opening for the lens. That way there is no reflection on the bead. The colour saturation is good and the details are clear. Well done. You could try another version where the main subject is in focus but the background is made up of smaller and definitely out of focus beads from the same manufacturer.
Judi
|
|
|
|
|
Roberto Okamura
{K:22851} 3/3/2005
|
James, I didn?t undestand what is this object, but I think this shot was very well done! Considering this angle, dark backgroung, reflection and lighting... I don?t undestand about commercial photography to technicaly help you... I?m sorry!
Best regards!
Roberto.
|
|
|
|
|
Alastair Bell
{K:29571} 3/3/2005
|
Hi James,
I think (opinion only) that if you photograph an object then it is a real representation of that object so therefore there is no comeback on you as the photographer. Now if you were to manipulate it heavily in PS to add or remove parts of the item there may be an issue. Correcting (enhancing?) colour through levels, curves and saturation should be ok as long as the end result is a recognisably reasonably accurate representation of the original. Next time you go past a McDonalds (I know you would never go into one of those given you own a restaurant!) look at the pictures of their burgers to see what artistic licence is legal....
This image is good... well exposed, great contrast and very definitely suitable for sales brochures.
Well done James
|
|
|
|
|
Melissa
{K:1791} 3/3/2005
|
Jim, You have solved the reflection problem very well. Another way to do it would be to use a polarizing filter with studio lights. The filter will minimize reflections. The presentation itself is good. The window light left it a little flat though. If it were backlit, it would definetely have more dimension. The way to do that after the fact, is to mask out the bead, put it on a black background, add a color gradient layer (maybe a gold spot with black edges) between the bead and the black and then adjust the opacity independently on the gradient. As far as making it look better than it is, and what the consequences to you as the photographer are; not to worry. Your client gave you a job, and accepted the image to represent his or her product. In terms of what to charge, evaluate the time you have invested, consider your artistry, equipment and overhead, and finally, find out what the median price per hour is for a commercial photographer in your area. Hope this info helps. Best of luck in your endeavors. If you want to make $$ as a photog, commercial is the way to go! If I can be of any further help to you, email me at melissa@nvisionphotography.com
|
|
0 
