Picture Feedback Megathread

[MILFandCookies]

@MILFandCookies I just got my DSLR, what settings (shutter, ISO, and aperature) are best for photographing people?

The key is to have the person's face exposed well, and as much of the surroundings as possible.

Watch one of these videos to understand the exposure triangle: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=exposure+triangle

And once you understand that, here's the answer to your question:
1) Shutter speed 1/200 or quicker if the subject is moving, 1/160 if they're sitting

Why? If the shutter speed is slower than this, the subject can have motion blur

2) ISO as low as possible while still getting enough light. Try not to go over 1600 if possible

Why? High ISO means the sensor is more sensitive to light (the camera literally charges the sensor with electricity to do this) but if it's high, you'll get noise (a static-looking pattern) - EXACTLY the same thing that happens when you open your eyes in the dark at night. The specific number will change depending on the camera, but for the ones Andy recommends, 1600 is the cutoff between a little noise and a lot of noise. Denoising programs like Topaz Labs and Lightroom's new AI Denoising feature can compensate if you have to go over 1600

3) Aperture at f/2 or higher ("faster" in photog speak, I can explain why they use this terminology but it's unneccesary). This is confusing, because the f number is actually the bottom of a fraction... so f/1.2 is MORE than f/2, because it's really f:1/1.2 vs f:1/2, and 1/1.2 is MORE than 1/2.

Why? Because a wider open aperture means more background separation (blurry background, sharp in focus subject.) I don't want to go into the optical science of why this is because it's complicated and unnecessary... The important thing is that blurry backgrounds look better, and there's hard data (OKCupid did a study) showing that the blurrier the background, the more matches you get.

Caution though, if you have an aperture at f/1.4 or f/1.2, you might run into the problem where the depth of field is too narrow... what I mean is the part of the image that's in focus is too small - for example, the eyes might be in focus, but the nose and ears are blurry. Or if they're looking at an angle, one eye might be in focus but the other eye is blurry... So at first I'd stick to f/1.8 or f/2 while you get used to photography. Good news is that to get > f/1.8 you have to spend a lot extra on lenses, so it probably won't be an option anyway.

I got super nerdy and in the weeds there, feel free to ask me to clarify anything

 

[Vic]

@MILFandCookies I just got my DSLR, what settings (shutter, ISO, and aperature) are best for photographing people?

The key is to have the person's face exposed well, and as much of the surroundings as possible.

Watch one of these videos to understand the exposure triangle: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=exposure+triangle

And once you understand that, here's the answer to your question:
1) Shutter speed 1/200 or quicker if the subject is moving, 1/160 if they're sitting

Why? If the shutter speed is slower than this, the subject can have motion blur

2) ISO as low as possible while still getting enough light. Try not to go over 1600 if possible

Why? High ISO means the sensor is more sensitive to light (the camera literally charges the sensor with electricity to do this) but if it's high, you'll get noise (a static-looking pattern) - EXACTLY the same thing that happens when you open your eyes in the dark at night. The specific number will change depending on the camera, but for the ones Andy recommends, 1600 is the cutoff between a little noise and a lot of noise. Denoising programs like Topaz Labs and Lightroom's new AI Denoising feature can compensate if you have to go over 1600

3) Aperture at f/2 or higher ("faster" in photog speak, I can explain why they use this terminology but it's unneccesary). This is confusing, because the f number is actually the bottom of a fraction... so f/1.2 is MORE than f/2, because it's really f:1/1.2 vs f:1/2, and 1/1.2 is MORE than 1/2.

Why? Because a wider open aperture means more background separation (blurry background, sharp in focus subject.) I don't want to go into the optical science of why this is because it's complicated and unnecessary... The important thing is that blurry backgrounds look better, and there's hard data (OKCupid did a study) showing that the blurrier the background, the more matches you get.

Caution though, if you have an aperture at f/1.4 or f/1.2, you might run into the problem where the depth of field is too narrow... what I mean is the part of the image that's in focus is too small - for example, the eyes might be in focus, but the nose and ears are blurry. Or if they're looking at an angle, one eye might be in focus but the other eye is blurry... So at first I'd stick to f/1.8 or f/2 while you get used to photography. Good news is that to get > f/1.8 you have to spend a lot extra on lenses, so it probably won't be an option anyway.

I got super nerdy and in the weeds there, feel free to ask me to clarify anything

Appreciate all this! I bought a pretty old DSLR due to my budget. Specifically a Canon EOS Rebel XT. If I get really into photography I will work to upgrade. I can't go above ISO 1600 on this camera so no worries there. Lowest it goes is 200 I think. I wrote all this in my phone notes.

I am just tinkering with the camera right now, but I am having an issue right now where the display is not working. I didn't see the seller say that in the listing, so maybe I just haven't configured it right yet.

 

[Skelly92]

I have been trying to improve my dating the last couple of weeks. Any feedback on these photos would be great thanks.

It's a good start.

Did you check out Andy's Tinder Inspiration article, and my guest post for him? Both will help you develop an inner skill:
Tinder Photo Inspiration: https://killyourinnerloser.com/inspiration/
The "Paparazzi Factor": https://killyourinnerloser.com/paparazzi-factor/

I also roasted a bunch of peoples' Tinder photos, looking at those videos will help you develop a sense of what's good and bad (mods, if you don't want me linking to this, I'm happy to delete it, just let me know)
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL-qjFUFJ6UqvocoTOmTyoI2_8T4Q09nkZ

You have a lot of improvement to make, I have a lot of feedback, but me giving you a long list might discourage you more than help you. The good news is that there's many many more gains to be had once you start improving.

Thanks for the feedback, I have read the articles before, but will give them another read and check out the videos.

 

[rohanp]

MILFandCookies really like your pfp ngl. Looks badass asf.

 

[MILFandCookies]

@MILFandCookies really like your pfp ngl. Looks badass asf.

Thanks man

 

[MisterE]

@MILFandCookies

I am very interested in booking a shoot in the future. Too broke for now though. I would be curious as to your opinion. Do you think where I am at now, looks wise, I could at least set up a very basic profile on tinder / hinge / bumble etc and get even a bare minimum of results yet.? This along with cold approaching are huge sticking points for me. Willing to PM pics or post them in here. Let me know.

If you are willing to share pictures of yourself, consider to post them in here so we all can learn from the feedback.

 

[MILFandCookies]

Your problem isn't your looks.

Everyone can improve looks, me, you, everyone on here, and from your avatar I see you're above average. You're lean, you groom well, etc.

Heads up, my feedback will be BRUTAL, but there's a huge silver lining in that you have a lot of improvement, which means your potential results are leagues higher than they are right now. I share this in the spirit of tough love in hopes that you'll improve from it and get to the love life you want, which is 100% possible for you specifically.

Here goes:

I'll be honest with you your photo game is 0/10. I don't get the red dragon (didn't know what it was, I thought it was a cthulu thing and even then... why?)

Why do you put a gun on your profile? Are you trying to attract girls who grew up with abusive fathers? I'm all for the 2nd amendment, I own a gun myself - but it's not right for a dating profile.

The only photo you have of yourself is a selfie with stairs in the background.

The POV photos of you fucking a girl are probably a plus on FetLife, so that's a point for you, but I have no idea what your body looks like.

The rest of your photos are stock photos, or a photo of a drink on a counter. Saying 0 things about you except that you drink sometimes, you have a gun, and you're into random things - not helpful.

Except the fucking photos, those are a plus, but in context with the rest of your profile it looks like you're a psycho that sometimes fucks crazy chicks.

The picture I get is an abusive angry alcoholic that likes anime. I'm pretty sure that's not who you are, but that's what your FetLife profile is telling girls.

Your Tinder profile isn't much better.

Like I said, my feedback is brutal.

But like I also said, there's a silver lining.

If you get your photos from a 0/10 to even a 3/10 you'll get some matches. Not many, but a few. When you get your photos to 8/10 or higher (through me, or someone else, or taking them on your own) you'll have access to 4 dates a week with hotties if you want. No question about it.

Either save up for a professional, or just copy the photos from Andy's inspiration article: http://killyourinnerloser.com/inspiration/
I wouldn't follow your gut on photos right now, just copy what you see others succeeding with.

I hope this is taken in the constructive, tough love way that I meant it. I know my feedback was harsh, but like I said, it's good news in the long run. Happy to help you on the journey just tag me and I'll give my feedback/advice.

 

[MILFandCookies]

@MILFandCookies

Of course it is constructive. Honestly if anything on here I need more feed back clearly not less. And if what I was doing was working (it currently isn't obv) then I wouldn't even be here probably. So yes things need correcting, by people who have better results than me btw, so lets correct them.

Just hit me with whatever your clear and honest thoughts are with no reservations.

This is actually inspiring to me to think that I'm just doing it wrong but can succeed if I change whatever dumbshit it is that I'm doing that is turning off girls, esp the higher quality ones (which is what this is about at this point, already killing it with lower quality chicks obv).

I edited my original post with more feedback after you replied, refresh the page and you'll be able to see it.

 

[MILFandCookies]

@MILFandCookies

I will do some thinking on this feedback and maybe try taking some new ones. Do you think that's even worthwhile right now though with my iphone alone? Or am I going to need a new camera (either buy or find some dude with one as discussed) before I even bother?

It's good practice, even if the photos don't come out great.

Also, it'll still be an improvement over what you have so far, so yeah I'd start working at it with your iphone.

 

[Paid Renegade]

Great thread. Any feedback (all welcome) on this pic?
Women on photofeeler seem to give a slight edge to the new pic, but curious what yall think before I add it to my tinder profile. I also did an edit where I desaturated the bright blues because I thought it might look better, but not sure. Same score on photofeeler.

As a side note, I know I haven't really gone asking for looks feedback much on this forum but I am definitely appreciative of any constructive criticism in general.

 

[kratjeuh]

Great thread. Any feedback (all welcome) on this pic?
2- 9115.5 (9.5).jpg
Specifically, if it looks better than this pic, which I'm looking to replace/update:
IMG_0922.2 - Copy.jpg
Women on photofeeler seem to give a slight edge to the new pic, but curious what yall think before I add it to my tinder profile. I also did an edit where I desaturated the bright blues because I thought it might look better, but not sure. Same score on photofeeler.
2023-11-19.png
9115.6 - black-grey.jpg
As a side note, I know I haven't really gone asking for looks feedback much on this forum but I am definitely appreciative of any constructive criticism in general.

These are very good pics but

- I think your new one looks to hard faceapped, mind sharing the original pic and which changes you made?

- If you ever try to recreate this, go more through your legs. Going deep through your legs would give the pic so much more power and intention

 

[Paid Renegade]

kratjeuh Yeah I used the “handsome” filter set at 2 or 3 I think. So maybe too much but also I used this thing in photoshop called “smooth skin”, which basically is just what it sounds like but I think as a result it looks very airbrushed so idk. I figured it’d be alright since my face is farther and looking away. On anything where I’m close or looking right at the camera (like my main photo) I keep FaceApp to a bare minimum. Right now my main tinder photo is just Hollywood 2.

Good tip about the angle too. Overall you think it’s an upgrade from the old pic or nah?

Edit- also one thing I look for any time I’m doing a photofeeler test is any comments such as “looks artificial” or “would prefer without filter/effects” since those are default comments that can be added.

 

[kratjeuh]

Good tip about the angle too. Overall you think it’s an upgrade from the old pic or nah?

Yes because now you can clearly see you’re surfing and the action is more dynamic

 

[Foducossy]

As a side note, I know I haven't really gone asking for looks feedback much on this forum but I am definitely appreciative of any constructive criticism in general.

New pic is better. Beard looks better too. In the older pic I don’t really like the thick beard under your chin, it could be trimmed more IMO. Your hair is quite clean cut so a cleaner beard probably is more harmonious overall.

 

[Foducossy]

As a side note, I know I haven't really gone asking for looks feedback much on this forum but I am definitely appreciative of any constructive criticism in general.

New pic is better. Beard looks better too. In the older pic I don’t really like the thick beard under your chin, it could be trimmed more IMO. Your hair is quite clean cut so a cleaner beard probably is more harmonious overall.

Paid Renegade btw I like the black life jacket more, though it is unrealistic for it to be black (for safety reasons its usually bright isn’t it?). But desaturating the surfboard looks weird for sure.

I’d resaturate the board at least, but I think the original is fine.

 

[Paid Renegade]

@Paid Renegade btw I like the black life jacket more, though it is unrealistic for it to be black (for safety reasons its usually bright isn’t it?). But desaturating the surfboard looks weird for sure.

I’d resaturate the board at least, but I think the original is fine.

Thanks, yeah one of the comments I received on the original photo was “would prefer different clothing” so I had a hunch the neon blue was the problem. All black life jackets are definitely a thing. While the black version didn’t score higher in attractiveness it was also the only photo I tested so far that didn’t get the “different clothes” comment. I agree with you I just think it looks cooler.

I’ll do a version with the color returned to the surfboard! I was trying to be more matchy matchy but I see what you mean

 

[Foducossy]

@Paid Renegade btw I like the black life jacket more, though it is unrealistic for it to be black (for safety reasons its usually bright isn’t it?). But desaturating the surfboard looks weird for sure.

I’d resaturate the board at least, but I think the original is fine.

Thanks, yeah one of the comments I received on the original photo was “would prefer different clothing” so I had a hunch the neon blue was the problem. All black life jackets are definitely a thing. While the black version didn’t score higher in attractiveness it was also the only photo I tested so far that didn’t get the “different clothes” comment. I agree with you I just think it looks cooler.

I’ll do a version with the color returned to the surfboard! I was trying to be more matchy matchy but I see what you mean

Yep the issue with the blue life jacket is that when you first look at the pic you can’t help but have eyes drawn to it. (I’m quite sensitive to this sort of thing and notice it.) Black just disappears so I can focus on your your face.

Also try saturating the water a little, could be nice if it’s a deeper green. You don’t want it to be too crazy edited tho, there’s a sweet spot.

 

[Radical]

Can you not change the colour of it in editing?

Surely thats not super difficult with current photoshop

 

[Foducossy]

Can you not change the colour of it in editing?

Surely thats not super difficult with current photoshop

Yeah there’s a tool called colour replacement which should do the trick

 

[Paid Renegade]

foducossy42 How's this?