khiem_nguyen1 Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 Thanks everybody for your blunt and helpful comment I need to learn alot more from all of you. Thanks again ! Sot made by LEICA R3 , Summicron 50mm f2, kodak gold 200<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abufletcher Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 The composition and natural lighting in this shot are much better than in the last two images that you posted. Just keep working at it. And do remember that photographs of YOUR children should be just as compelling as photographs of OTHER PEOPLE'S children. In other words, try to imagine how interesting your photographs would be to other people who don't know (and love) your children. One great way to develop your abilities to do child photography is do learn to make great photos of other people's children. You might start with children of friends and family but the ultimate challenge is to be able to make personality revealing photos of total strangers.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asher Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 Cute kid... Nice car.. I know your license plate number now for your Camry..<P> Like it's been said above and in your previous post, you could improve your photos quite a bit simply by paying close attention to the background. I suspect the view of your child distracted you from all the other elements in the photo.<P>Henri Cartier Bresson supposedly shot with an attachment that rendered the scene upside-down. I don't know if this is true, but the point is well-taken: Good compositions can be ruined by distracting elements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asher Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 One more point: Ralph Gibson has been quoted as saying <I>"The rangefinder enables one to see what�s outside of the frame as well as what�s inside of the frame. You make a decision predicated on the presence and/or the absence of various aspects of the subject. With a reflex, the camera determines what is seen, and half the time it's out of focus."</I><P> I believe his point is that when one views through an RF, all elements appear "in focus" whether you're shooting at f2 or f16, including elements outside the framelines, and therefore one is more able to see what will and will not be in the photo. With an SLR, however, only those elements on which the lens is focused are clear since the scene is viewed through the lens at its widest aperture, while the rest of the elements are thrown out of focus in the viewfinder, unless one uses the DOF preview button extensively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now