Cosplay Photography!

honestly it's going to turn into the same thread as the other one as far as negativity goes

use walls/clear as much as the background as possible
use angles if you can't do either

File: image.jpg (437KB, 958x2048px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 958x2048px

>>9061850
>use walls/clear as much as the background as possible

Why? I like shoots with scenery. Maybe for hallshots, sure, but if you're having a paid shoot, why not?

Photo by BumnyTuan, I like her photos because they're more like a story than a portrait. It just feels more natural.

File: image.jpg (89KB, 708x500px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 708x500px

>>9061864
Oops, BunnyTuan*

Another photo by her.

>>9061864
from OP:
> can hall photos ever look really good? How do people get around the location and equipment limitations ect?

>>9061871
I love how this takes up such a small amount of space irl but is super effective

>>9061884
Ah, I didn't realize you were responding to OP. Yeah, I agree. Less background and angles are best.

imo, con photography is mostly a waste of time for most photographers, especially the more advanced ones. It's a situation set up for you to fail. However, it's a great way to break into portraiture if you're just starting out.

>>9061839
Convention photos and con photos can absolutely look good. Your photographer simply has to know something about photography.

Shit. Why are you guys so bad that you have to ask these dumb ass questions?

>>9061839
You said this was a thread for "really good phootgraphers". Why did you choose this picture for the OP?

The light is flat, the model (while pretty) has the blankest, most expressionless face ever, and the angle is terrible.

>>9063900
Well no, I am not bad and I do know something about photography as I said; however photographing a plant in a studio where you have complete control over every detail is very different to photographing people in a place where you may have limited equipment, space or whatever.
>>9063962
Idk I thought the angle was interesting and it isn't unflattering, the depth of field is good and it creates a story. I do however agree that the lighting could be more dynamic but it isn't bad per say and I feel leeway has to be given in terms of models as I feel most people aren't professional and are just doing it for fun?

Also, feel free to post better examples, that was supposed to be the point of the thread

File: yuuko_ichihara_by_bellatrixaiden-d8onb64.jpg (218KB, 1024x678px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1024x678px

>>9064209

File: street_fighter_x_tekken_poison__final_fight__by_jane_po-d7dtcmv.jpg (306KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 1024x683px

>>9064209
.

>>9064237
That arm bothers the shit outta me.

>>9064263
Agreed

>>9064237
At what point do you fault the photographer and not the cosplayer? You can give someone direction but if they can't pose properly, there's only so much you can really do. (I had a cosplay shoot earlier in the month and my photographer was amazed that I took direction so well because of how difficult it usually is for her to get people to understand)

>>9061839
hope they credited the artist that this image was based on.

>>9065856
Nip slips. Nip slips bring the blame! Just ask Blue Shell/Just Cosplay Photography.

>>9066313
??

Bump. I'd like to see more nice photos and tips!

File: 01.png (198KB, 487x833px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 487x833px

>>9068096
Never go FULL RETARD!

>>9069123
What the fuck? Who does he think is stalking him?!
Cocaine prostitutes? !

>>9068096
>>9069123
Tip: Don't be like butch lee

>>9069123
>#alphasdontgetthemselvesraped

whatisthis

>>9061850
>use angles
don't do this or limit these to a few. i opened a "pro" photographer's album after a con and 99% of them were dutch angles. made it look like the guy was fucking drunk or missing a shoe that day.

>>9069884
Yeah, Dutch Angles are rarely properly used by cosplayer photographers

>>9069884
>dutch angles
>clearing the background
If you're going to chime in with your retarded opinion maybe you should learn that there's more than one type of angle and op was clearly not referring to the dutch one.

I'm actually really not happy with these photos that I got taken. This photographer is well known in my area and I looked through her photos and was pretty impressed. She didn't edit any of my photos and I looked like a greasy mess. I had to fix them myself but some just weren't salvageable. There were even some where I was clearly not ready which just made me ???. This was AFTER she said that she would be sending them to me, fully edited. I was even more upset because I paid more for these than for a shoot I had last year and those photos were so much better.

Lesson learned: just because a photographer is popular doesn't necessarily make them good

>>9070757
I'm pretty stupid, but what is the "proper" way to shoot dutch angles?

>>9070806
Dutch angles were classically used to create a sense of tension and discomfort. So they would be great for Joker, Harley Quinn, Jason Voorhees type cosplayers, but not necessarily good for Lex Luthor, Sailor Moon, Master Chief and 99% of cosplayers. Dutch angles also work great for Spider-Man type characters that usually aren't depicted as being upright and vertical most of the time. Personally I use a lot of Dutch angles when I'm doing hallway shots and there's a strong vertical or horizontal line like light poles, trees, handrails, etc in the frame and its impractical to just ask the cosplayer to move to another area. I'm ocd as fuck and those lines will bother the shit out of me if they're not 100% vertical or horizontal. Sometimes it can be fixed with cropping and rotating the photo, but just shooting at a Dutch angle is much more convinient most of the time. That's just me being ocd as fuck though. Most people probably never even notice how awkward a pole or a tree looks in the background if you shoot it slightly askew.

>>9070769
she's good, it's just that she wasn't good to you
you paid her so unless she really liked your shots you're just a number at the end of the day
it could be one of many reasons. she wasn't feeling it during the shoot and the junk was made then. she didn't like whatever character you were. she didn't want to drag things out too long and just gave it to you unedited. you aren't one of the beautiful ones and she didn't want to edit. could be anything.

File: 13431522_465827116961289_5165022841854019688_n.jpg (66KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 640x960px

>>9070806
i really like this one

>>9071085
>gun in face
>no arm
>lines in frame are all over the place, doesn't draw you to any kind of focal point

Anon, the dutch angle is literally the only interesting thing about this image, that doesn't make it a good example.

File: tilted.png (775KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

775KB, 640x960px

>>9071085
I feel like that photo would have been more dynamic without the angle

File: image.jpg (277KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1920x1080px

>>9071265
If anything it should be tilted even more.

>>9071275
>should be tilted even more

In your shot the CHARACTER is tilted, not the frame.

Dutch angles are stupid. Don't use them. If someone uses Dutch angles, I automatically assume they are the most rank amateur. And I'm usually right.

>>9071049
I would say yes but she's shot me once before (a few quick shots at a one day event) and she was the one that was super eager to shoot with me again. I feel like she overbooked because the photos from Friday shoots looked much better than the rest of the weekend.

If anything, I should've booked with someone else. It looks like she just can't shoot indoors/more atmospheric (it was supposed to be horror). All of her outside pictures look great. The rest are just shitty. Again, my own fault.

File: meet_by_35ryo-d5eo5vi.jpg (125KB, 900x647px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 900x647px

as with >>9061864
I like the use of scenery to make photography that feel more like illustrations/scenes.
gonna be dumping a few from my inspo folder

File: mononoke_by_35ryo-d64ap29.jpg (532KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 1000x667px

>>9071358

File: the_beautiful_world_by_35ryo-d73d93j.jpg (316KB, 1000x594px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 1000x594px

>>9071359

File: only_my_railgun_by_asaremu-d5iw1jx.jpg (216KB, 728x1096px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 728x1096px

>>9071361
now a couple that don't rely so much on natural landscapes
I think angles work when there are a lot of varying angles and lines present in the image itself

File: 56288d94876990d63743383f824cf153-d7ogqyy.jpg (425KB, 601x900px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 601x900px

>>9071370

File: saber_ii___fate_stay_night_by_midgard1612-d5qr6oo.jpg (107KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 900x600px

>>9071374
really love the lighting and movement in this one

>>9071377
I like this, I think it would've been better to have the negative space the left side of the image rather than the right so your eye follows the line of the coat into a space rather than the edge of the photo but other than that I really like this
>>9071358
The lighting and softness in this, much more artistic

Also thanks anon for actually posting some photo! People moaning but not providing anything better

File: hetalia___taiwan_by_kirawinter-d3bjj5r.jpg (520KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 600x900px

>>9071377
for more close-up portrait photography, I guess simple is best?

File: ashura_and_ashura___rg_veda_by_kirawinter-d3fepe7.jpg (549KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 600x900px

>>9071392

File: attack_on_titan_ehren_by_35ryo-d73dlcn.jpg (376KB, 1000x566px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 1000x566px

>>9071393
lastly, posting one that has lovely framing (but also wouldn't have looked as good without the quality cosplay)

>>9071389
I agree, would have balanced it out more to have more space on the left, and created a stronger gesture

glad you appreciate it! I enjoy art too, so I suppose my tastes also draw from that

>>9071358
>>9071393
These two are my favorites so far.

>>9071347
>In your shot the CHARACTER is tilted, not the frame.
Most people can't make that pose unless they're propped up on something or are willing to throw themselves on the ground a bunch of times. It's easier to tilt the whole thing since people are going to be looking at the model and not the background. Either that or don't bother trying to replicate the pose at all because it's going to look retarded and half assed like this >>9071265

>>9071358
Who even ARE these people?

If you can't tell who the characters are right away, it's a shit photo.

>>9071370
Was this shot in the middle of a earthquake?

>>9071361
Decent shot.

>>9071374
Nice, only because legs. Should have gotten closer in on the model.

>>9071377
Awkward crop; would have been awesome if they zoomed out to get the whole body.

>>9071392
Good portrait, if a little washed out. Lose the hand next time.

>>9071393
Best one you posted yet. Love the models.

>>9071395
Also good.

File: 908080808.jpg (291KB, 1600x1112px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1600x1112px

>>9071707
>>9071358

It's pretty obvious that it's from Hotarubi no Mori E-- so sorry you don't know the characters.

>>9071707
About the saber... maybe her shoes sucked?

File: katarina_lol_by_juliacosplay1.jpg (292KB, 2997x2000px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 2997x2000px

I'll post some inspirational photos too. The dark lighting in this shot suits Kat

>>9074885
Could be anything that does it (the crop certainly isn't helping), but they look REALLY disproportionate.

>>9071395
The lighting is really good in this, I also really like the framing

How do you guys recommend doing hallway shots? I've seen some really nice portrait shots from above the bust and I always seem to get a bad angle on my point and shoot as a casual...

>>9064237
MEDIUM TEST

File: vogue sample.jpg (120KB, 432x550px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 432x550px

>>9075550
Look at fashion magazines. The best photogrphers in the world are making hundreds of thousands, and in some cases, millions of dollars taking pictures of outlandish outfits.

Look at what they're doing, and emulate it.

>>9075697
Good advice, Eugene

File: dutch angle.jpg (72KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 640x960px

>>9075704
Or, you can just tilt your frame 45 degrees in every shot like these fuckin' jerk-offs and call it a day.

>>9069123
He said him allowing us to look at his work is a privilege.

I lold.

>>9075697
>>9075704

Can't be Eugene, because if it was then he ain't listening to his own advice too

I would like to drown background people out. How do I do that fancy bokeh effect? I used a film camera before but I can't seem to replicate the effects.

>>9076489
You need a fast lens, at a wide open (like 2.8 or greater, this is why primes are your god and why everyone who uses full frame swears by the 85mm 1.8 or faster prime), or 50mm and 1.8 or faster. This also is affected by lens quality, there are some lenses that are famous for their creamy and high quality bokeh.

>>9076500
I know what F-stops (the basics at least) are but I'm lost at primes or 85mm.

Any opinion on diffusers?

>>9076524
Prime Lens are lens with a single range, like 50mm or 85mm. You can zoom in or zoom out. Due to have a fixed focal length, they are the sharpest lens, meaning you'll get the clearest photo, assuming you aren't shaking from the chills or some neurological disease.

Lens with the ability to zoom can't get as sharp a photo, under regular use, because the lens is designed to work at different ranges, so the goal of that lens is totally different. If you have a slow exposure on a tripod, you can get a sharp lens though, but not with regular hand-held use.

>>9076609
English, please.

>>9076489
>>9076524
But seriously, if you can't get information on lenses in the year 2016, you should kill yourself. YouTube is a fucking thing, you know.

>>9076669
So you ask for English (on pretty basic knowledge) but then tell someone else to kill themselves for not using google???

>>9076669
Get your eyes checked Anon.

>>9076609
You are too kind for that asshole anon, friend.

>>9076609
Those sound neat and something I would use, thanks.

>>9076669
Yeah and? I'm not allowed to ask here?

>>9077310
I am not >>9076669

>>9077380
I was saying that this person >>9076609 is too kind to have to deal with an asshole like >>9076669. Make of that what you will.

Moar good cosplay photography pls

>>9075711
>angled hardcore
>still cuts off a limb

File: mgawrhynhyhalpcjslefytewextljcutsbwsnjpb-740.jpg (266KB, 740x493px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 740x493px

>>9087755

File: yajxzozhbjedlivkhtwlzqloozajlrkclulfvqrz-740.jpg (106KB, 740x675px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 740x675px

>>9087759

File: chlwrsimrouoqkadmefmekifkninsugqmbhuyjcw-740.jpg (331KB, 481x740px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 481x740px

>>9087763

File: itvcsgzluywzwiakamfeeitqfofhhryedaejuivd-740.jpg (179KB, 494x740px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 494x740px

>>9087764

File: kocyvqsjbgutzkujsiiucesykmsvblzrfmjfkvbz-740.jpg (395KB, 494x740px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 494x740px

>>9087766

File: 1462084115203.jpg (171KB, 800x1274px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 800x1274px

>>9087767

File: wgbzlhcpggmlekkljxiijtmitgrdqrvisynmmpfv-740.jpg (248KB, 494x740px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 494x740px

>>9087772
last one

>>9087755
I think this had potential but I don't like it
>>9087763
They should've gone either white or black for the background, it isn't that hard to do in photoshop, it would've improved this photo a lot
>>9087764
I like this but they should've been more aware of the placement of the bright light and maybe moved so the model blocked it out but otherwise very nice
>>9087766
I do like this quite a lot actually although the colour balance feels off maybe, the model is very grey but it kinda works because there's so much blue obvs in that position you wouldn't want them 'glowing with life' but idk

>>9087772
The middle one is the only one I like desu, it's really nice except for the fact that her head is cut off but that might just be the cropping for the set. Otherwise, it would be a really good picture.

Relevant tip: Try to have the eyes looking somewhere, if this is the actual picture then it stops far too close to her line of sight. I'm not saying there has to be an actual subject in the picture that she is looking at but there should be enough negative space that the viewer eyes have somewhere to follow her gaze without immediately hitting the edge of the photo. (I hope that makes sense) e.g. >>9071395 >>9064232

Negative space is your friends, if you have it, use it!

Who's regarded as the USA's top photographer these days?

>>9090659
If Kotaku had any credibility, it'd be Anna Fischer, Dave Yang, Mineralblu or Jason Laboy. Reality is, these are the only idiots willing to let them/Lucas use their photos for free.

>>9092152
oh and Martin Wong, despite his little attempt on that pixels thing which gained zero traction, as sites are still doing what they normal do as more accounts pop up just reposting people's works

So really what I'm getting from this thread is that there aren't actually many good photographers? I get that it is probably a hobby for a lot of people but it's still a bit disappointing

>>9061884
>can hall photos ever look really good?
Not really, like maybe one or two of the shots I take are ones that i like. I would do photoshoots, but I like walking around and taking pictures of whatever I think looks cool
t. hall photoman

>>9090659
Me, I have 93 fans on tumblr

>>9095544
Most cosplay photographers are just guys who bought gear. There are going few good ones out there but no one is a superstar; the most well known are not necessarily the best at the craft but best at marketing. I'm not that good myself and think my shots are kind of meh.

I do think that pugoffka girl from Russia is pretty good, or at least has great access to locations and people.

What kills me the most is lack of time.

>>9095696
Pugoffka is good, and definitely the definition of having great locations and knowing people. I've heard she uses ghost editors to do some of her work, which is why there is sometimes some variation in her style.

>>9063962
The depth of field is great, and the lighting shouldn't be too dynamic for a photo like that.

>>9071347
The frame is slightly tilted too, check out the angle of the building in the back.

>>9100219
>depth of field is "great"

You have a really low standard for cosplay photography, I see.

>>9100300
I'll bite, what's so bad about that aspect?

>>9100418
Not him but bokeh blurring is super basic stuff that people seem to lap up. It's not even a skill, just something a lens does automatically because of physics

File: depth.jpg (369KB, 751x1102px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 751x1102px

>>9100300
Well, the depth of field doesn't give any effect of depth. She doesn't look like she's really high up or far away from the background. The darkness of the bg doesn't contrast with the darkness of her costume.

She looks like she's just standing on steps. No drama.

Pic related for separation of the subject and bg.

>>9100477
I know that, but it still looks good.

>>9100219
The depth of field effect would have been better if the model had simply been posed facing the opposite direction. As she is, facing away from the staircase, the stairs come closer as you go up towards her head, minimizing the separation effect. If she had been posed facing towards the staircase the stairs would have fallen away behind her, making the background much more blown out.

Not only that, since the light source seems to be coming from the top of the stairs her cape and bat logo are cast in shadow. Facing the other direction would have put more light on the costume details.

>>9100477
it's indeed a skill. OP is a good example. her eyes are not in focus.

>>9061895
at this point why not just make a miniature and just photoshop the fuck out of everything...

Because that's literally what they did anyways.

>>9100716
They look in focus to me?

File: Polymanga.jpg (149KB, 1163x985px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1163x985px

thought on this

>>9104254
You got down to their level that's good, too many people forget to think about point of view and perspective so thumbs up there.
In terms of the background: It isn't ideal so a shallower depth of field would definitely be better as it blurs it out more (google about apertures if you don't know how to achieve this). Also the thick black line isn't straight and is quite distracting, play about with straightening the image (there is nothing wrong with post-processing). You could also try make it darker or adjust the colours, maybe mess about a bit with it see if anything works. In terms of 'in-camera' flashes can be used to illuminate the subject and whilst creating a black background HOWEVER when I say flash I DO NOT mean the on camera one 99.99% that will give you shit. If you are interested in flashes please look up information about lighting and flash guns or speedlites.
Composition: Rule of Thirds is your friend, google it, you will see a definite improvement in your images if you start to think about your composition and negative space. For this image, I would have either came in closer so he filled the frame or shifted so he was to the right edge with space to the left. Due to the background however I think coming in closer would've been better (try cropping it now and see what you think).
That's the main points I have, it is well lit, not dark or blurry which sounds silly but honestly is a really good start. A lot of people seem to forget that lighting is really important.