Critic please

Hello,

 

It has been a while since I have posted here. I have been really

busy. I was wondering if I could get a critic on this portrait of my

little girl. This is actually taken with my new Canon Digital camera

with the Canon 24-70 2.8L lens. I have not yet had the opportunity

to try my Leica R lenses with the new camera body. I plan to obtain

the adapter soon. Some small color correction and blemish editing

was done in photoshop. I used on fill flash at -1 2/3.

 

Regards,

Steve<div></div>

Better lighting next time, a more complimentary background, and either more or less of the hands/arms.

 

Of course regarless of the technical crap she's cute and these type of shots seem to get cherished as the years go by. Have fun, she'll be twenty before you can blink.

Delicious -- maybe a little too cold in tone, almost like porcelin(Sp.?)

I love the color, and she looks like an angel. Sweet.

 

Critique? I kinda agree with the above. Unfortunate dirt patch in the background. And, i'd

prefer the traditional/journalism rule about not cropping at a joint, but whatever. It's still

sweet.

I like how you have her looking off camera and her facial expression is quite pleasing. I don't have a problem with the lighting, because it seems to be soft and not too harsh with the shadows. The dress is a bit blown out and maybe some shading or a half nd filter would help get the exposure on the dress down. I think your white balance is off, its too blue on my screen (this doesn't mean much because my screen may very well be off). If you were shooting in the shadows, the color temperature will be different than in the sun. Good shot that can be tweeked to be a much better one. Cute girl too.

I have no prob with the background, but I'd crop somewhere around the right elbow at the bottom.

 

It's a remarkable portrait in that she looks like a very dignified young lady-beyond her years. I predict hundreds of really good and interesting pictures of her. Fathers and daughters can be really special.

Sorry, I can't do it. She's too cute to be involved in any form of critique. :-)

I LOVE bright, overcast lighting for skin tones! Someone made a good point about the earth though-would've been better with all foliage behind her.

I really appreciate the input. I think I will crop the image further, and try to adjust the color balance.

 

Regards,

Steve

"blemish editing"

 

If the "blemishes" on the child are natural, i.e. a mole or such, I would leave them in. Agree with other above, especially the crop of arms.

Nice work.<br>

Maybe warm up the color a touch.<br>

At the same time, I feel like maybe as the lighting caused low saturation..why not take it a step further and see how you like the shot as 1) B&W and 2) a even further desaturated color image (barely-there color look).<br>And yes, maybe take a look at a few different crops and see how you like it.<br><br>Either way, a shot to be proud of.

Hello,

 

The blemishes where just a few scratches she got on the way to the park from her 3 year old brother.

SP, was just wondering, could you expand on what you mean by "better lighting"?

Thanx.

Hi Stephen. It's been a while. How is that order for the digital back shaping up?<p>Now to the picture. She is beautiful so it is a keeper for a family photo. The first thing I noticed was the hand crop so perhaps retaking the shot would be nice.<p>I think that this would look better in black and white and I would even try two variations. One with the DOF to encompass the leaves and one wide open with the focus on her eyes of course.

Stephen,

 

For these shots, learn to get picky....small things add up.

 

The Fern on the left is almost growing out of her head. The Tip of that plant starts to

come into sharp focus at the end.

 

Try shooting without the Fill Flash. I think this shot would have been nicer without it. Try

using a Small Reflector instead.

Rene,

 

The Leica DMR is still backordered I think. I cancelled my order anyway. I got tired of waiting and decided I can just use Leica R lenses with a Canon DSLR. I sold my R9 as well and the Leica zoom lens 28-90 vario. I kept the Leica R primes. I seem to be getting the results I want with Digital. I forgot how nice it is to actually have auto focus with all these kids running around:)

 

So I guess I have come full circle minus a few dollars from having bought and sold some gear:)

 

I look forward to posting some more shots soon.

 

thanks for everyone's comments.

 

Regards

Steve

Stephen, long time, no hear.

 

What can we say - she is gorgeous! :-)

 

As stated, I think it is a tad overexposed due to fill flash and the background is unfortunately. The upside is that you will have gazzilion wonderful photos with this model.

Cute kid, good light, not crazy about the background.

she`s beautiful stephen. (she deserves better than a digital canon...! )

<I>"SP, was just wondering, could you expand on what you mean by "better lighting"? Thanx."</I>

<P>

Sorry, should have been more explicit.

<P>

I was thinking that the soft light wasn't flattering. Maybe open shade on a sunny day with a with a lighter background behind her? Something to make her "pop" from the background. It's a subjective comment I realize, and many people seem to like it. I just think I'd prefer something different.

No prob, sp. I'm thinking I like the soft light for her soft skin, but the background is a bit incongruous. Nice picture, but for me, the background puts it into the family snap as opposed to what could be a very nice portrait.

I like the cold tones; they complement the look and pose. Makes for a presence that is more undefinable-universal (as symbol) than specifically that of one particular person. One of the more remarkable child portraits I've seen around here. Now if however you want your pictures to look like everybody else's pictures, you should follow everyone's advice as above listed.

Stephen, it's good to see you back here. If Leica got that damned DMR out by Dec '04 maybe we'd have something interesting happening. I wonder how many other people cancelled.

 

 

RJ Hicks wrote: "I don't have a problem with the lighting"

 

john Lo Pinto wrote: "I have no prob with the background"

 

You guys are not picky enough to be on this forum! :-P

 

FWIW it's a very plain shot, Stephen. Lighting is too wishy-washy and the background is unattractive and prominent. BTW she's a nice looking girl - but you already knew that. :-)

Stephen,

 

I saw the picture on my phone yesterday but today I logged in and saw int on my flat screen. I would definitely blur the background for next time by opening wide.

<I>"Now if however you want your pictures to look like everybody else's pictures, you should follow everyone's advice as above listed."</I>

<P>

Actually the advice listed above seems fairly reasonable to me.

<P>

It's funny but, I almost invariably see two types of kid shots. The first is the urban-mall-portrait-studio shot. Either a set-style or white background with the kid holding some oversized stuffed toy plucked from the bin of, well, oversize stuffed toys.

<P>

And the other (typically done when the second kid arrives) is the dressed-in-nice-clothes-shoulder-to-shoulder-Cheshire-cat-grin pose. Heads are dead center in the image and it's almost always taken with a point and shoot with a big blast of flash.

<P>

Stephen's shot is much better than typical, but it could be better. I don't think he would have posted it if he thought otherwise.