mtmixon

<p>Happy Wednesday. I've had a photographic dry spell recently, due to a string of illnesses in our household that have kept me indoors and tending noses more than I'd like. But we did make it to a wedding recently, and while I didn't take many photos (didn't want to interfere with the hired photographer), I did take a few that I sent on to the couple. This one is the one "artistic' shot of the set, taken during the ceremony. I was in my seat (holding my son), but felt compelled to capture the light through the bride's veil before she and the light moved on.</p><div></div>

<p>My contribution this week was taken up in Gig Harbor, Washington, on a chilly and peaceful winter morning.</p><div></div>

<p>Chris - you caught me! I am so used to taking photographs with my Nikon D90, that it didn't even occur to me that my new Canon (which I use when I can't lug my D90 around) didn't also count as a Nikon. :-)</p>

<p>Getting in under the wire. Lots of festive photos this week. My contribution is a shot I took while taking my son to a nearby park. There were leaves everywhere, and I liked how the light caught this particular leaf, stranded on the basketball court blacktop.</p><div></div>

<p>Lots of great photos this week. A few of my favorites:<br /> <strong>Jens Frederiksen</strong> - love the feel of isolation<br /> <strong>John Farrar</strong> - beautiful light<br /> <strong>David Janson</strong> - a very peaceful composition<br /> <strong>Maurice Orozco</strong> - very creative abstract with wonderful color<br /> My contribution is from a recent hike in Santa Cruz. It was the play of light and lines that caught my attention.</p>

 

<p>Nikon D90, Sigma 17-50, 1/10 at f/4.5</p><div></div>

<p>The photos from <strong>Robert Wyatt</strong> and <strong>Tony Hadley</strong> really stand out so far. Stunning vistas. My contribution this week is from Halloween, specifically my son taking a much-needed water break after his first cuteness-for-candy trade adventure.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks Peter. That's the one I'm going to go with.</p>

<p>I posted this question on another thread, but never got any replies, so I'm giving it its own thread. :-)<br>

I have an Acratech GV2 and am looking for a good 'L' plate. The Really Right Stuff (RRS) plates get great reviews, but the dedicated RRS plate for the D90 doesn't fit if I have the battery grip attached. Now I know the battery grip can be removed, but I tend to keep the battery grip on all of the time (I have big hands, so the grip makes for a more comfortable shooting experience), so I wonder if the convenience of the 'L' plate while on the tripod is off-set by the inconvenience of having to constantly remove the battery grip when I want to attach the 'L' plate.<br>

<br /> Anyone else have this issue? Are there better 'L' plate options for D90 + battery grip?</p>

<p>I'm in the same boat (e.g. I have an Acratech GV2 and am looking for a good 'L' plate), but the dedicated RRS plate for the D90 doesn't fit if I have the battery grip attached. Now I know the battery grip can be removed, but I tend to keep the battery grip on all of the time, so I wonder if the convenience of the 'L' plate while on the tripod is off-set by the inconvenience of having to constantly remove the battery grip when I want to attach the 'L' plate.<br>

Anyone else have this issue? Are there better 'L' plate options for D90 + battery grip?</p>

<p>In honor of the new Smurf movie, my contribution this week is of a blue tree I came across while walking through a nursery in Washington. There was no one around to ask, and it wasn't on prominent display or for sale, so I can only assume it's real. Never seen one of these before.</p><div></div>

<p>I recently had the opportunity to visit Olympic National Forest in Washington State...a simply stunning place that I need to get back to very soon. Visiting such a place with a baby does limit the amount of hiking and photographing one can do, but I did manage to get a few good shots. This is one of my favorites. It's Sul Doc Falls, a very reachable destination (about 1.5 miles round-trip).</p><div></div>

<p>Happy Wednesday everyone. I'm getting in much earlier this week than usual, so there are fewer photos to look at. But a couple have definitely caught my eye for their aesthetic and simple beauty: ismail basaran and Finlay Jolliffe. Great work, both of you.<br>

I've spent the last few weeks crawling around on the floor with my son, as he learns to crawl and explore a suddenly much larger world. This is one of my recent favorites.</p><div></div>

<p><strong>Anish </strong>- gorgeous photo. The muted colors and expansive vista really caught my eye.</p>

<p>My offering this week is another photo of my son, this time in a contemplative mood.</p><div></div>

<p>Getting in a little late this week. So many wonderful photos, but these especially caught my eye:</p>

<ul>

<li><strong>Lil Judd</strong> - really crisp & well-composed capture of the Nuthatch. Please share your photography more. :-)</li>

<li><strong>Jeannean Buglady</strong> - I love the pattern of out-of-focus yellow blooms against the blue sky, with the bird off-center.</li>

<li><strong>Ray House</strong> - gorgeous sunset. The little birds along the shore are a nice touch.</li>

<li><strong>Hamish Gray</strong> - fantastic.</li>

<li><strong>John Farrar</strong> - wonderful tones.</li>

<li><strong>James Kazan</strong> - love the minimalism and stark angles. Very eye-catching.</li>

<li><strong>Roberta Davidson</strong> - great colors and clarity.</li>

<li><strong>Robert Wayt</strong> - beautiful composition and colors. A very peaceful setting.</li>

</ul>

<p>My contribution is a photo I took while playing with my son over the weekend. During the week I have less time to spend with him, so I really enjoy our weekend mornings.</p><div></div>

<p>Another great week for photos. These, in particular, caught my eye:</p>

<ul>

<li><strong>Caillum</strong> - great framing, unusual and therefore effective</li>

<li><strong>Tony Hadley</strong> - beautiful, minimalist shot; definitely conveys winter</li>

<li><strong>Ray House</strong> - gorgeous; I like the symmetry of the three birds</li>

<li><strong>Ismail</strong> - simple and elegant photo</li>

<li><strong>John Rowell</strong> - humorous and well composed</li>

<li><strong>Paul Jim</strong> - wonderful capture of a magnificent animal</li>

<li><strong>Doug Santo</strong> - great colors and DOF</li>

</ul>

<p>We traveled to a funeral this past weekend, and so I didn't get much of a chance to take many pictures. But I did take this photo of my son while we were waiting for our flight back.</p><div></div>

<p>Great photos again this week. A few in particular caught my eye:</p>

<ul>

<li><strong>Rick Moran</strong> - wonderful scene, awesome DOF</li>

<li><strong>Ben Schaefer</strong> - gorgeous pastel colors</li>

<li><strong>Don Harper</strong> - great mood you captured</li>

</ul>

<p>My subject these days is almost exclusively my son, so here's another one. :-)</p><div></div>

<p>Nice shots so far this week. It's always worthwhile to check in.<br>

<strong>Gej</strong> - beautiful sunset.<br>

<strong>Jeff</strong> - great capture of the two surfers at different stages of their hobby.<br>

My photo this week was taken yesterday, and it's of my son and my dad having a little fun with their hands.</p><div></div>

<p>Tim - never heard of the golden mean ratio, but it makes a lot of sense. I suppose you're right regarding what dominates the eye's attention...even though lines leading out of the frame do grab the eye, bright spots (especially bright spots comprised of a human face) would still trump. I do see artistic merit in both versions...part of what makes this fun. :-)</p><div></div>

<p>I've been away for a couple days and was pleasantly surprised by the number of responses to this thread. Lots of great feedback.</p>

<p>It looks like more people like the photo than don't like it, and generally for the same reasons as I do (e.g. it's an atypical baby shot). That's good, as it suggests I conveyed what I wanted to convey.</p>

<p>Regarding the advice and suggestions for improvement, much of it I agree with. I unfortunately couldn't do anything about some of the criticisms - this wasn't a posed photo, but rather me grabbing my camera in response to some great light while my son was in his exer-saucer. Had I stopped to change his clothes, background etc., the photo may have been lost. Light and babies don't stay in one mood for long. :-)</p>

<p>I have created a second version (<a href="../photo/12231051">http://www.photo.net/photo/12231051</a>) that incorporates much of the other feedback, and I believe I like the second version better. In particular:</p>

 

<ul>

<li>I agree that a straight black and white treatment works better than the split tone. There might be a split tone that works for this image, but the one I chose wasn't the best.</li>

<li>I cropped the photo, mostly per Jonathan Green's suggestion. I went back and forth on this one, as it is a rather severe crop, but the more I thought about it, the more it made sense to eliminate most of his right arm, as it simply led the eye out of the frame (which, I suspect, is why many people didn't like that part of the photo).</li>

<li>I addressed the highlights on the right side of his head. Actually, the histogram never showed any clipping there, but given the darkness elsewhere in the photo, the lighter areas are accentuated, with those on the right side of his forehead being most noticeable. A little recovery and selective exposure adjustment has addressed that.</li>

<li>I cloned out the eyelash shadow on his nose.</li>

<li>I lessened the blacks on the left side of his face so that the outline of his left eye is a bit more visible while still keeping that side of his face darker than the other. There is also a little catch-light that I put back in (I had cloned it out the first time).</li>

</ul>

<p>Thanks again for all of the feedback, and thanks in particular to Tom Mann and Tim Lookingbill for providing some alternate treatments. This has been a good learning experience.</p>

 

<p>Thanks for the feedback, both good and bad. It's very useful to know what people like and dislike, as that helps me know whether or not I might try something different the next time. Ratings are easier to get (and can be a general barometer), but honest comments are always better.<br>

I tend to avoid posed shots (where you can control wardrobe, gesture, etc.) as candid photos are always more interesting (to me). As such, you give up some measure of control over things like wardrobe etc. and rely instead on taking many, many shots and looking through them in post to find the best ones. This is obviously even more the case when shooting babies, as posing them is almost always difficult.<br>

On this photo, I chose to use the one where he had his hand in front of his face as it appears that he is in deep thought (pondering his next meal, perhaps, or as Dave suggested, figuring out how he can escape without any grasp of self-mobility), and I kind of liked the idea of a "serious" baby portrait. I do agree that it would be better if the top of his head wasn't cut off, but babies move and I was using a fixed focal length, so there you go. :-)</p>

<p>I recognize that the Critique forum is the appropriate venue for critique requests, but as I've not gotten any there, I thought I'd come here. :-)<br>

This photo (<a href="../photo/12173630">http://www.photo.net/photo/12173630</a>) was taken last week. There was some great, strong light coming through our kitchen window, and I wanted to experiment with creating a more dramatic portrait than I generally pursue, and so I exposed for the highlights on my son's face and cast the rest of him into darkness. I then did a bit of work in Lightroom to balance the lights and darks a bit more and apply a subtle split tone. I personally like the photo, but it has received an average rating below 4 (meaning a below average photo), and so I was wondering what I could have done differently to make this a better portrait. <br>

It's possible that those rating it low just don't like "dark" photos of babies, but I suspect there are ways I could have improved this photo (either at capture or in post) and I'd be interested to know what those might be.<br>

Thanks in advance.<br>

-Mike</p>

<p>Forgot to attach the image...out of practice, it appears. :-)</p><div></div>

<p>I haven't been able to post for a while, but have enjoyed checking in each week and seeing what my fellow photographers are seeing and posting.<br /> This week my contribution is a whimsical photograph taken of my son and the mountain of gifts we moved to the den for unwrapping. I found the perspective amusing, and selected this shot (out of dozens that I took) because I like my son's expression...not only is he looking at the gifts, but he appears to be rubbing his hands in greedy anticipation. :-)<br /> Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.</p>

<p>Congratulations, Philip. My son was born a month ago, and so I know very well the desire to have the right lenses around to photograph him in his different stages of growth (knowing that they go so fast). I have four lenses, all of which I will probably use to photograph him (the Nikon 35/1.8, the Tamron 90/2.8 macro, the Sigma 50-150/2.8 and the Tokina 12-24), but the one I have used exclusively during his first month has been the 35/1.8. It allows me to nice and close, is fast enough to take advantage of natural light, focuses fast, and is small/light enough that I can pick it up and shoot without much effort. I haven't had the need to get any closer and do macro work on his nostrils, nor have I needed to zoom out or in much, seeing as he stays pretty stationary and so I can position myself where I want to be to get the shot I want. Aesthetically, other lenses will give you different looks which you may prefer, but practically, the 35 has served me very well and given me <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=973178">images</a> I (and my wife) really enjoy.<br /> <br /> Regarding maximum aperture, I have definitely taken advantage of the 1.8 - 2.8 range, but have found that I need to compromise on what part of his face is in focus. I can get his eyes very sharp but then his nose and/or mouth might be a little soft. That look works on some photos, but for others, where I want to have his entire face in focus, I've had to dial the aperture down to 4 or 5.6. This usually isn't an issue, unless you have a very busy background that would benefit from some additional blurring. But the nice thing about babies is that you can put them where you want them. :-)<br>

<br /> Enjoy your new baby and have fun taking thousands of pictures.</p>

<p>Some great shots today (per usual). A few that caught my eye:</p>

<ul>

<li><strong>jf zhang</strong> - very peaceful scene, lovely light.</li>

<li><strong>Melissa Papaj</strong> - creative, playful composition. </li>

<li><strong>Jonas Fjellstedy</strong> - love the minimalism and the light.</li>

<li><strong>Narayan Kovvali</strong> - nice perspective.</li>

<li><strong>Jeannean Buglady</strong> - great capture.</li>

<li><strong>Kevin Delson</strong> - cool (pun intended) capture. :-)</li>

</ul>

<p>I've been having fun photographing my son, and am actually enjoying the challenge of finding different ways to capture him, especially given that his range of activities is fairly limited. As all babies, he basically just sleeps and eats, and since my wife won't allow me to post any shots of him nursing, I'm left with the sleeping photos. :-)</p><div></div>