Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Photo Critiques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 11, 2008, 11:04 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

just a few taken yesterday

feel free to offer any comment on any of them





using backlight from a window








aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 11, 2008, 12:13 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 136
Default

Your pictures are awesome!
My favorites are #2 and #3

Keep posting, please!
artmustel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 12:25 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

artmustel wrote:
Quote:
Your pictures are awesome!
My favorites are #2 and #3

Keep posting, please!
Thanks:-)
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 5:31 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Donna A.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: md
Posts: 598
Default

nice work j. I just had to stop by.
Donna A. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 5:33 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

All of the images are nice "candids" as you noted and will certainly look great in the photo album. I'll detail why I feel they are or aren't effective portraits.


#1. It is a beautiful pose and very natural looking and they eyes are striking though I don't find myself on the eyes right away. The bright white top she is wearing becomes the COI and there is no way around that. A high key background would have worked better here. Having her arm raised close to her face does help lead the viewer up to her eyes, though not quickly.


#2 This is another low key scene where the face should be the brightest element in the scene. Accent lighting is ok, but here you have the highlights on entire back and top of the head blown out. I find that I have to force my eyes to find her eyes. Very cute girl and a nice natural pose though.


#3 Here you have a bright background with the subject wearing a dark top...Opposite of #1. Luckily there is some darkness in the eyes. The largest dark area is still the top she is wearing. Also, the extra background space behind her head on the right side of the image doesn't seem to add anything to the image, IMO.


#4 Though not a great pose you are keyed most effective in this one. The face is the brightest element in the scene except for the highlights on the shoulder which is slightly exposed higher than the face so it's only a slight distraction.


Thanks for sharing!


Rodney Blair
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 6:14 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

RodneyBlair wrote:
Quote:
All of the images are nice "candids" as you noted and will certainly look great in the photo album. I'll detail why I feel they are or aren't effective portraits.


#1. It is a beautiful pose and very natural looking and they eyes are striking though I don't find myself on the eyes right away. The bright white top she is wearing becomes the COI and there is no way around that. A high key background would have worked better here. Having her arm raised close to her face does help lead the viewer up to her eyes, though not quickly.


#2 This is another low key scene where the face should be the brightest element in the scene. Accent lighting is ok, but here you have the highlights on entire back and top of the head blown out. I find that I have to force my eyes to find her eyes. Very cute girl and a nice natural pose though.


#3 Here you have a bright background with the subject wearing a dark top...Opposite of #1. Luckily there is some darkness in the eyes. The largest dark area is still the top she is wearing. Also, the extra background space behind her head on the right side of the image doesn't seem to add anything to the image, IMO.


#4 Though not a great pose you are keyed most effective in this one. The face is the brightest element in the scene except for the highlights on the shoulder which is slightly exposed higher than the face so it's only a slight distraction.


Thanks for sharing!


Rodney Blair

OK I tried to asses my own shots, I have taken on board your comments but I do not totally agree with everything you say. You have to remember these are not the set up type portraits so you have to work with what you have at the time. I do think that #3 and #4 definitely work as effective portraits, I was concentrating on spontaneity rather than technique

#1

I amsurprised you have not picked the glaring mistakes of the line behind her and the cut off hand. However I find that you are drawn to expression on her face.



@2 I'm not sure about the over exposure on her back. However I think the lighting works, people like the shot so it must have something going for it

#3 I don't see a problem with the dark top, I like the fact that you are drawn to her eyes, you have to remember these are not your usual sterile set up portraits, this shot I'm most happy with although it could have been improved on



#4 I cant see anything wrong with the pose, it is meant to be different, meant to show real life, a candid situation so I cant see how it does not work as a portrait



Thanks for taking the time to critique, I am still learning in this area of photography

aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 6:52 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

aladyforty wrote:
Quote:
OK I tried to asses my own shots, I have taken on board your comments but I do not totally agree with everything you say. You have to remember these are not the set up type portraits so you have to work with what you have at the time. I do think that #3 and #4 definitely work as effective portraits, I was concentrating on spontaneity rather than technique


#1I amsurprised you have not picked the glaring mistakes of the line behind her and the cut off hand. However I find that you are drawn to expression on her face.



@2 I'm not sure about the over exposure on her back. However I think the lighting works, people like the shot so it must have something going for it

#3 I don't see a problem with the dark top, I like the fact that you are drawn to her eyes, you have to remember these are not your usual sterile set up portraits, this shot I'm most happy with although it could have been improved on



#4 I cant see anything wrong with the pose, it is meant to be different, meant to show real life, a candid situation so I cant see how it does not work as a portrait



Thanks for taking the time to critique, I am still learning in this area of photography
Hi aladyforty,


You said upfront that these were candid shots and I said they will certainly look great in the photo album where most people keep there many candid shots.


#1. I was not looking for mistakes and I did not mention those elements that may be visible in the scene because you clearly stated these are candid shots. I assume if you decide to make prints you will remove unpleasing elements. My comments were strictly about how you have the keys mixed up. I complimented you on a nice pose though her hand is chopped off. Since you didn't chop it off at the wrist, you got something right. There is no rule that says the entire hand must be in the frame, though there is a rule about chopping of limbs at the joints.


#2. Sure, people will love the shot. If you are selling prints to a parent, they will purchase them. That does not mean the little girl's face is the center of interest. Maybe the face isn't supposed to be the center of interest??


#3. I never said the dark top is a problem for this shot. I pointed out that the keys are opposite the keys of the #1 image. I pointed out that luckily there is enough darkness in the eyes to draw attention and further noted that the top was the largest dark area(area of highest contrast). I suggested a slightly different crop...you may or may not do that and that is totally up to you.


#4. Again, if the intended purpose is to catch dozens of candids of the little girl then this is just another look. The pose isn't great, nor is it bad. A lower camera angle would have probably achieved everything you were trying for. I'm not sure if you did it in post or when you shot the image, but the shadows are blown in her hair. This will produce a black blotch when printed.


My comments to you were intended to help you better understand the keys. If you aren't interested then that is perfectly okay with me. Just ignore my comments and suggestion.


Best regards,
Rodney

RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 7:02 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
bahadir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
Default



That's been a great series, Julie

Itmightbe misleading tryingto interpretthings in therealm of beautydependingonone or twoparameters only!As you put it # 1 could also be a striking image witha uncut hand!My fave, however,is #2 here with the 'divine light' highlighting the subject whomanagesto freeze even the power of time with that sudden look : )
bahadir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 7:54 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

RodneyBlair wrote:
Quote:
aladyforty wrote:
Quote:
OK I tried to asses my own shots, I have taken on board your comments but I do not totally agree with everything you say. You have to remember these are not the set up type portraits so you have to work with what you have at the time. I do think that #3 and #4 definitely work as effective portraits, I was concentrating on spontaneity rather than technique


#1I amsurprised you have not picked the glaring mistakes of the line behind her and the cut off hand. However I find that you are drawn to expression on her face.



@2 I'm not sure about the over exposure on her back. However I think the lighting works, people like the shot so it must have something going for it

#3 I don't see a problem with the dark top, I like the fact that you are drawn to her eyes, you have to remember these are not your usual sterile set up portraits, this shot I'm most happy with although it could have been improved on



#4 I cant see anything wrong with the pose, it is meant to be different, meant to show real life, a candid situation so I cant see how it does not work as a portrait



Thanks for taking the time to critique, I am still learning in this area of photography
Hi aladyforty,


You said upfront that these were candid shots and I said they will certainly look great in the photo album where most people keep there many candid shots.


#1. I was not looking for mistakes and I did not mention those elements that may be visible in the scene because you clearly stated these are candid shots. I assume if you decide to make prints you will remove unpleasing elements. My comments were strictly about how you have the keys mixed up. I complimented you on a nice pose though her hand is chopped off. Since you didn't chop it off at the wrist, you got something right. There is no rule that says the entire hand must be in the frame, though there is a rule about chopping of limbs at the joints.


#2. Sure, people will love the shot. If you are selling prints to a parent, they will purchase them. That does not mean the little girl's face is the center of interest. Maybe the face isn't supposed to be the center of interest??


#3. I never said the dark top is a problem for this shot. I pointed out that the keys are opposite the keys of the #1 image. I pointed out that luckily there is enough darkness in the eyes to draw attention and further noted that the top was the largest dark area(area of highest contrast). I suggested a slightly different crop...you may or may not do that and that is totally up to you.


#4. Again, if the intended purpose is to catch dozens of candids of the little girl then this is just another look. The pose isn't great, nor is it bad. A lower camera angle would have probably achieved everything you were trying for. I'm not sure if you did it in post or when you shot the image, but the shadows are blown in her hair. This will produce a black blotch when printed.


My comments to you were intended to help you better understand the keys. If you aren't interested then that is perfectly okay with me. Just ignore my comments and suggestion.


Best regards,
Rodney
While I take on board all you have said, I feel you are only critiquing them as set up type portraits, they are candid so its a different scenario to set up studio shots or set up shots in general. The parents actually asked for a natural look as the set up ones come a dime a dozen. If they wanted that sort of photo there are plenty of studio photographers in the area

I have done a course on photographic judging and it was taught by some of the top photography judges in our state. The first thing we were taught is how to look at a photo and this was the order #1 Impact (does it make you look at it longer or have the effect of making you come back to it) #2. composition and #3. technique.

So these are the things I think of when taking a photo and I'm often amazed at the photos I see that win competitions, I also see some glaring faults in some of the so called masters photos so I defiantly do not take offense to any of your comments.

thanks again
Julie
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 8:11 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

You still do not get it. It doesn't matter if you have a fancy studio with all the most expensive lighting equipment or simply using available light through a window. You have to know how to work with th light regardless the source. Why do you use flash for fill? Because you wish to alter the highlight to shadow ratio. Quite often we make that choice when shooting candids as you made some choices while shooting the images you share with us here. You could have made some different choices and I believe the reason you didn't is because you do not understand how to make an element the center of interest by use of contrast.

It does not matter who you trained with or what kind of teaching you have. Here on this set of images you have not displayed that you understand the effective use of contrast or have any understand of low key or high key elements. If we wear dark clothing then we want the background to be dark unless the clothing is the intended center of interest. It isn't a rule...That is simply how the eyes work.

Enjoy your camera and the images you shoot with it. Enjoy processing your images and enjoy sharing them, but don't think that you have effectively rendered your intended center of interest simply because you are applauded for cute images.

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:29 AM.