Professional Photo

[snousle]

It took all morning, but I got one that is at least acceptable:



"Excessively squinty" is the smallest problem I could come up with out of 150+ shots. Better luck tomorrow? I hope to have a non-embarrassing web page by then. It's so much more difficult than I had expected.

Comments

[gloeden.livejournal.com]

Stop oppressing me with your excessive whiteness!

See what I did there?
You're wearing chef's whites.
Get it?! Get it?!
Thank you, I'll be here all week, don't forget to tip your waiter.

[snousle.livejournal.com]

The nice thing is that for only $20 and a trip to the restaurant supply store, you too can be white!

[allanh.livejournal.com]

It's not excessively squinty, it's a very handsome portrait of a handsome man.

Hell, I'D certainly hire someone this cute to cater a special event. :)

Oooh. Veiny hands. Sexxxxxy.

I like it.

[bigredpaul.livejournal.com]

I've got to disagree with you strongly here. This photo makes him look like he hates his job, and I'd never hire him based on this photo.

If you want a wonderful photo with great natural light, you must use the last hour before sunset - the Golden Hour. That wonderful warm horizontal light makes everyone look gorgeous and it won't be too bright for the squinty "I hate my job" look.

[bigredpaul.livejournal.com]

Oh, and the jacket needs to be pinned back in the small of his back to make it look tailored - it'll look like he's more successful then, which is a weird thing to think about, but it's small details like this that are important visual and psychological cues.

Yes, I think too much about this sort of thing.

[snousle.livejournal.com]

Like I hate my job??? Because it's squinty? Unfortunately I always look like that.

Back to the drawing board, I guess.

[bbearseviltwin.livejournal.com]

you do look like you are angry about something

[bbearseviltwin.livejournal.com]

You weren't squinting in the meat picture on your website

[beastbriskett.livejournal.com]

Your eyes sparkle like obsidian when you're happy. Paul's golden hour idea is a good one. Keep trying! :)

[bigredpaul.livejournal.com]

You don't always look like that. But if I may suggest, the lighting thing is good. Think about the pleasure that cooking brings you when you are being photographed. And most of all, smile. That is the best thing you can do right there.

Great Pic & request for assistance

[chef2b.livejournal.com]

Greetings,

I'm Sky's partner and he's raved about your cooking and programming skills.

Riddle me this Batman.

I don't think that there's a program out there that already does this. I need a better way to maintain my recipes. I'm a baker/pastry guy. Some are in Imperial weight, some metric weight, and some in volume. Ideally, I'd be able to have all three and a quick conversion from one to another. This would entail utilizing the book of yields for those items that are used for regular baking.

I also want to be able to list baker's percentages.

FYI Baker's percentage expresses the ingredients in a recipe as a percentage of the total amount of flour in the recipe by weight or if their is no flour by the primary ingredient (again determined by weight)].

I'm moving into a more experimental phase of baking and want to be able to tweak recipes to make them my own. Baker's percentages would be extremely helpful.

Do you know of anything already out there? Is this something simple to create or a horrid pain in the ass (as opposed to a delightful pain in the ass)?

Thanks.

Re: Great Pic & request for assistance

[snousle.livejournal.com]

Hm, well, there are several issues here. If you had all the relevant numbers and conversion factors for your recipes in a uniform format (say, a spreadsheet with consistent meanings for each column) it is not terribly hard to use a database such as Access to do a mass conversion to consistent units. I could potentially help with that.

Getting to that uniform format can be a real pain, though. And I'm not sure I would trust the book of yields to give you the right conversion factors for your particular kind of flour, eggs, etc.

Personally, I keep things in a database of my own design, where EVERYTHING is measured in grams. If I use a recipe that is volumetric, I weigh it as I cook it and record it in gram weight. I started with recipes that are intended to be constant and are merely added to each event, but now I am moving to a representation where recipes are copied from event to event and potentially tweaked each time.

Also, because my portion sizes vary a lot from one event to another, I now record the recipes at the scale at which they were tested, so I know when to watch out for scaling issues. Eventually I want to be able to get the right total amount by summarizing the nutritional data (carbs, fat, protein) for the whole meal as a fraction of RDA rather than guessing at things.

But it's not like my own system is anywhere near where I want it to be yet. It's not in any way easy!

About that picture

[ursine1.livejournal.com]

So instead of a butcher, you now look like a green grocer. You need to show the results of your skills, not just the raw products. Think of a cabinet maker that shows some wood that he would use rather than the finished goods he produces.

And about measurements. Yes, use g and ml. Take a look at the English language version of 1080 Recipes which expresses ingredients in both metric and Imperial/US units. They avoid the volume problem by using fluid ounces rather than "cups".

Chuck, I use my kitchen several times a day, get a good one!

Re: About that picture

[bbearseviltwin.livejournal.com]

"So instead of a butcher, you now look like a green grocer. You need to show the results of your skills, not just the raw products. Think of a cabinet maker that shows some wood that he would use rather than the finished goods he produces." Good point. All though you might want to do a layout of a sampling of your dishes, a picture of you with some finished food might be a very good idea.

[bitterlawngnome.livejournal.com]

Ugh I wish I was there to help. the solution here is very simple, you should be in clear but indirect light.

Re the post that disappeared. Don't forget that even the best people only get a success rate of something like 20%. Take a LOT of photos, way more than you think you need. Don't just click once on a given pose, try 25 or more shots of it. It's not like you have to pay for the film.

Also the more recent research suggests that people do not look at "perfect" images of models anymore in the context of advertising; we have learned to filter it out. People's eyes do not rest on it, and they do not have an emotional reaction, people have become very good at identifying stock photography.

[snousle.livejournal.com]

Also the more recent research suggests that people do not look at "perfect" images of models anymore in the context of advertising

Well, that is encouraging at least.

I think this would also be easier if I had someone with an aptitude for photography on the other side of the camera.

[dhpbear.livejournal.com]

Are these all self-timer shots?

[dhpbear.livejournal.com]

Yes! Those "Perfect" models often adorn 'squatter' sites.

One of my web pet-peeves: Generic People!

To wit:

[jpeace.livejournal.com]

The preeminent chef of Bonerville. A+

[beastbriskett.livejournal.com]

You might try your "I'm gonna feed you this and you're gonna like it!" look.
Works for me.

Seriously, though, try tilting your nose just a bit down, like you're looking at something on the counter. Then glance up at the camera. Your eyelids will automatically raise.

...

[dorisduke.livejournal.com]

Actually I really like this picture.

Rapid Shots or Another Photographer ...

[(Anonymous)]

Often it's the nuances of expression from shot to shot wherein one finds the shot that satisfies.

If the camera can be set to do a (relatively) large number of shots in a series, most will be rejected, but it can be a quick way to get a great one with little effort -- especially if you want to avoid looking too 'posed'.

Another person doing the shooting (even candidly) can do wonders to bring out the 'real' you. Often it only takes someone not intimidated by the camera and/or unaware of your expectations -- recent DSLRs, when preset, do amazing things.

--Inspiritor--