how achieve this, p [EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

>>2960327
Well you'll need something that makes rainbow light and red light in the background, the rest is just take a photo of someone up close, I guess like a few feet away, and make sure your aperture is wide enough for bokeh. It's not incredibly complex, the hardest part is getting the light set up, or finding a model.

>>2960327
Design a rainbow gel filter and put it on a strobe/strong model light, you can make a gel filter like this with tape and scissors
Like >>2960335 said, wide aperture.
I'm not trying to undermine Petra Collins, but she isn't the most skilled artist and just is good at lighting and improv, also Iirc all of her work is done on film
It's likely this is just a slr with a fast 50 mm lens

>>2960358
This one looked digital to me due to the edge of yellow next to orange and the edge of cyan next to purple, but maybe it's just from Photoshopping in post.

>>2960358
agreed, I feel the same about about Tamara Lichenstein and Sandy Kim and a lot of similar photographers. it's just mildly interesting subjects on noisy film, and I wonder if people like it cause it's any good, or we pretend we like it because it's 'probably cool' and we want to be cool too. I was just impressed with this one because of how the colors were divided so cleanly into strips like that.

File: JakeHicksPhotography+Velvet+56mm+01.jpg (281KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 500x750px

>>2960358
>>2960366

I often feel that women portrait photographers really just ham everything and pass it off as a raw, realistic and gritty style. But they often just look like snapshit to me. Only one of my female peers actually has the intention and desire to create proper set ups with light and models. Great girl.

>>2960327

Look at fashion photographer jake hicks's website. He does loads of tutorials and trade secrets. He knows his shit.

>pic related

>>2960430
I can't understand why people like portraits like these. The only interesting thing is the light and colors and the model is doing the classic dont look at the camera candid pose.

If it was for a fashion job, he did a good job hiding the jewelry and dress.

>>2961953
>jake hick
just looked at his website

his other stuff is alright, but damn do I get triggered at photos like >>2960430 for some reason

>>2960430
to me that looks like a shot of a robot taken by a robot. theres no soul to it. personally i dont want digital perfection in my shots, i want character, depth and feeling. it's the imperfections that make thing interesting soulful imo

>>2964408
>>2961957
>>2961953

The point of the shoot seems to have gone over all your heads' here.

File: thank you for your post.gif (1MB, 150x150px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 150x150px

>>2960430
Thanks for this. I just bought one of those colored gel packs for my flash ($10, why not?) so this guy's site is perfect.

File: F80YGM8I834SGME.LARGE.jpg (61KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x600px

>>2960327
op image looks like a standard rgb led with a columnator lens on it, which tends to concentrate the 3 colours and you end up with distinct bands when you are close to it.