Matthew McManamey , Jan 27, 2012; 11:18 a.m.
Just thought I'd share this article Adorama just sent me, "Stunning fashion photos on a shoestring budget," featuring the Q...
http://www.adorama.com/ALC/Article.aspx?alias=Stunning-fashion-photos-on-a-shoestring-budget
a la Hin, I'll say WARNING: Adorama is trying to sell stuff - but since I'm more about good results cheap and less about, "Look at all of this cool, expensive equipment I have," (and that seems to be a popular trait on this forum) I thought some here would find this interesting, regardless of the author's motives.
Hin Man , Jan 27, 2012; 12:12 p.m.
It will be more interesting if the model is prettier or Qutter (best spelling bee). And darn it, they shoot it with a camera that I curse with Pentax. That Q ain't cheap, you can have done it with a $100~$200 used *istD, DS, or similar and a $50 50mm with A aperture. Alright, you've got my attention! I especially like the small softbox from Flashpoint. I need to look into the use of beauty-dish as I saw someone DIY type of beauty dish. I don't know how to make one and for a moment, I think it will be hilariously funny with plumbing pipe and a 12" frying wok next to my kids' faces. I am clueless in terms of studio shooting -- please laugh and I won't hear you.
While the flash is inexpensive, I will prefer to pick my manual flash with both bounce and swivel of my choice as there are just too many good ones to choose from. I got two copies of Nikon SB25 and they have manual power setting down to 1/64 and I have purchased Cactus v5 and the combination work quite well for me for learning. But I should shame myself in not putting my inexpensive gear to good use. I have a messy home and no expensive gear will help me clean up my place for some fun studio setup. I am yet to get an umbrella set and reflector.
Thank you so much for the link and a kick for the next what-to-do at home studio fun. However pretty and Qutter that model and the results look from that Adorama page, I won't change my thinking about Q, not until Pentax/Ricoh drop down its Q price to a more reasonable and competitive price point.
Matthew McManamey , Jan 27, 2012; 12:30 p.m.
I agree, everything here is budget but the Q, but it's interesting to see some quite nice looking shots from that dinky overpriced thing.
Yeah, the model isn't all that cute either (although I think the skintones are quite facinating), but when you blow your budget on a Q, the Craigslist Model Agency is the best you can do... :o)
Miserere Mei , Jan 27, 2012; 02:01 p.m.
Somebody needs to increase the model's food budget. That's all I can say!
Steve Smith 
, Jan 27, 2012; 02:15 p.m.
Somebody needs to increase the model's food budget. That's all I can say!
Definitely. give her a pie!
Frank B. Baiamonte , Jan 27, 2012; 02:55 p.m.
Is that model a real person, or a mannequin? Leaving out the size issues for a moment, that skin doesn't look real either. Is that the camera, or some sort of post processing?
Matthew McManamey , Jan 27, 2012; 03:37 p.m.
Somebody needs to increase the model's food budget.
How much food do you think she can afford working for the CMA?
Is that model a real person, or a mannequin?
Exactly my point about the skin tones; I was asking myself the same questions...
dorus oshiva 
, Jan 28, 2012; 10:14 a.m.
Richard Harris , Jan 28, 2012; 11:28 a.m.
Is this them trying to sell that Pentax Q thing as a portrait/fashion camera? Right, okay...
LOL at the pie comment :)
Patrick S 
, Jan 28, 2012; 09:11 p.m.
It's absurd. Absolute overkill with a $500 budget AND a new Q. Anyone starting with a film SLR, a 50mm lens, and a roll of Portra can do better. AND still come in under $500 gathering other cheap lighting stuff.
Mannequin, and pie, would blow the budget completely.
