The 20mm F1.7....

Discussion in 'Street, Documentary, and Portrait' started by DekHog, Aug 21, 2011.

  1. DekHog

    DekHog Mu-43 Top Veteran

    May 3, 2011
    .... is just too short for portraits, unless you catch people at the right angle. I took about a dozen, but unfortunately she was frog-faced on about nine of them! I should have put on the 50mm, but laziness got the better of me. :biggrin:

    I don't know about anyone else, but Lightroom does one hell of a job when it imports the RAW files (converted to DNG). They virtually need nothing done to them unless you want to get creative.

    A touch of glamour glow, and that was it....

    • Like Like x 10
  2. thearne3

    thearne3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jan 28, 2010
    Redding, CT USA
    Really nice capture. Color/tone is great!
  3. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    Lovely image thatb I am sure she is pleased with - it captures her personality and displays an air of inquisitiveness and confidence with a hint of humour showing through.
  4. KVG

    KVG Banned User

    May 10, 2011
    yyc(Calgary, AB)
    Real Name:
    Kelly Gibbons
    I'm glad to see you really dig the lens Derek. I love it(the photo)
  5. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Real Name:
    I agree with you completely. Of course I dent hurt to have a great model, does it? I've, personally, always preferred to be at arount 135mm ( equiv) for portraits. I think you've done really well to even get one shot that looks that good. I don't know that I could have done it with the 20mm.