Mitchell, your trick works!

Flutist · July 5, 2009

Still not what I would call a "great" picture, but maybe one of my best......:rolleyes

"J, could you tell mama when you are ready, and I will take your picture"

whiterice · July 5, 2009

That is so funny Flutist! I too read Mitchell's recent post and thought, "Duh, why not just ask my son!" I just haven't yet had to opp......can't wait to see if it works for me too!

Mitchell · July 5, 2009

Shannon, I'm glad to be of service.

I like your photo. The sidelighting really works here.

She's a cutie!

Flutist · July 5, 2009

Mitchell wrote:

Shannon, I'm glad to be of service.

I like your photo. The sidelighting really works here.

She's a cutie!

Thanks Mitchell. I was hoping the sidelighting would be approved

If she looked into the light of our sliding door, with it to my back, she was squinting something fierce...

Gary752 · July 6, 2009

Very nice BW conversion of a very cute girl! I would like to see the color version, or maybe a version of the BW with the color of the eyes.

GaryB

Flutist · July 6, 2009

BroPhoto wrote:

Very nice BW conversion of a very cute girl! I would like to see the color version, or maybe a version of the BW with the color of the eyes.

GaryB

For the most part this is un-edited. It's really hard to get any pic that shows her eye color. I can get my son's brilliant blue eyes, but hers I'm just not good enough to get.

I chose to go B&W with it and clone out the kitchen drawer pulls (gosh), I had my camera in hand to charge batteries and she wanted me to literally snap a photo. Well that seems what I'm capable of, so there ya go (ugh)

Gary752 · July 6, 2009

Flutist wrote:

For the most part this is un-edited. It's really hard to get any pic that shows her eye color. I can get my son's brilliant blue eyes, but hers I'm just not good enough to get.

I chose to go B&W with it and clone out the kitchen drawer pulls (gosh), I had my camera in hand to charge batteries and she wanted me to literally snap a photo. Well that seems what I'm capable of, so there ya go (ugh)

I think if you crop in close to the hair on the right side, this would be a great shot as well. I posted a photo earlier of an Elvis impersonator that has simular eyes (hazel) and I find it hard to capture color detail in his eyes as well. Most of the time he has his eyes closed because he puts so much feeling into his music, so getting shots of him with his eyes open is a challenge for me. In closing, I think you did a fantastic job in capturing her eyes, as there is a good amount of detail there!

GaryB

Flutist · July 6, 2009

Gary, as I want to be sure in what you're saying, make it a square shot, centered face?

Gary752 · July 6, 2009

Flutist wrote:

Gary, as I want to be sure in what you're saying, make it a square shot, centered face?

Not nessarilly square, just crop in a little closer to her hair. Maybe just enough to crop out the drawer pulls. I would leave a little space to the right of the hair. Others may say to crop in even closer, but I think just enough to remove the drawer pulls would be enough.

GaryB

Flutist · July 6, 2009

BroPhoto wrote:

Not nessarilly square, just crop in a little closer to her hair. Maybe just enough to crop out the drawer pulls. I would leave a little space to the right of the hair. Others may say to crop in even closer, but I think just enough to remove the drawer pulls would be enough.

GaryB

??? I really wish I had the skill to get rid of some of the grain. I'm cool with grainy pics but this is not one of them (had my ISO up to far for the situation)

Gary752 · July 6, 2009

Your last version of cropping looks great! I didn't notice the graininess untill you mentioned it, and looked closer. When I first looked at the photo, I was drawn to her eyes.

What are you using to edit your photos? In LightRoom, I think the Recovery slider (if I remember right - I just started using it) would eliminate some of the graininess. Maybe someone will chime in with a better way of fixing it.

GaryB

Flutist · July 6, 2009

PSE 4.0, it's all I have, other than iPhoto, which is basic at best.

Trevlan · July 6, 2009

What was Mitchell's trick? I love his photos, espcially of the youngest. What a character. ;-)

Mitchell · July 6, 2009

Trevlan wrote:

What was Mitchell's trick? I love his photos, espcially of the youngest. What a character. ;-)

Thanks, Frank.

Here's the thread about the trickery.

http://www.digitalgrin.com/showthread.php?t=135893

Flutist · July 6, 2009

Trevlan wrote:

What was Mitchell's trick? I love his photos, espcially of the youngest. What a character. ;-)

Oh my, Mitchell's kids are the cutest!!!!

jeffreaux2 · July 6, 2009

FWIW I like the color version best...maybe her hair and skin are too close in tones for my eyes in a monotone. Your skin tones look great.

With the XTi, I tried to stay below ISO400 for formal portraits. By formal, I mean something that I was either being paid to shoot...or something that I was shooting for personal use that was destined for print (like my daughter's Senior Portraits?). Of course, for events...or my own everyday memory catching I never had an issue using higher ISO's like 400 or 800.....though 1600 was a stretch for it. It just seemed to me that the noise seemed very well controlled below 400, but started creeping in at 400.

The 50D is an entirely different animal in these regards. ISO1600 is absolutely usable, and I commonly run the ISO up to 600....640....800 when shooting "formal" portraits in waning afternoon light. Another plus for the 50D in this regard is the ability to choose an ISO in increments smaller than a whole stop. This helps to get more light in the camera....yet just enough...without going a whole stop up in noise as well.

...sharing my observations since I knew you were shopping...

Flutist · July 6, 2009

Thanks Jeff, ya just shot my budget right out the window.......

jeffreaux2 · July 7, 2009

Flutist wrote:

Thanks Jeff, ya just shot my budget right out the window.......

Well dont forget what else I said...

The XTi is a VERY capable tool.....and are VERY cheap to buy up second hand. (but you can't afford mine!)

I shot quite a few weddings and a TON of portraits with one.

Flutist · July 7, 2009

jeffreaux2 wrote:

Well dont forget what else I said...

The XTi is a VERY capable tool.....and are VERY cheap to buy up second hand. (but you can't afford mine!)

I shot quite a few weddings and a TON of portraits with one.

can't afford yours?

what makes yours so special their mister? Hidden features the rest don't have

Scott_Quier · July 8, 2009

Flutist wrote:

can't afford yours? what makes yours so special their mister? Hidden features the rest don't have

It's not just a piece of equipment. He's loved it a long time, and has gotten it well broken in. Finally, he's been able, with a lot of patience, to teach it to produce magic!

jeffreaux2 · July 8, 2009

Scott_Quier wrote:

It's not just a piece of equipment. He's loved it a long time, and has gotten it well broken in. Finally, he's been able, with a lot of patience, to teach it to produce magic!

Mine is a familiar friend....with a lot of patience IT taught ME a thing or two...:D

Shannon,

...you wouldn't want it anyway...it's probably got like a gazillion actuations....and could die at anytime. IF it is still alive when I buy my next body I may have it converted to IR. In any event, it isn't for sale as I still use it as a back-up/ second camera.

I was told by a very intelligent photographer as I was considering going into the biz that cameras...really...were disposable, and that I would be upgrading probably every two years and that my best investment would be on good quality lenses and accessories. I thought that was BS, but as it turns out he was right, and I find myself thinking along the same lines. While the 50D is quite a bit more sophisticated than the XTi, I can assure you that there is absolutely zero difference in the style, or overall quality of my photography since I began using it. It didnt suddenly make me better...and in fact, due to the differences in controls and menus...and exposure quirks....has taken me several thousand actuations to get really comfortable with it.

Im of the opinion that to truely be able to express one's creativity, we should....well really HAVE to....have a very intimate understanding of our gear....being able to change the various dials and menu choices to suit our needs without much thought ....much as a painter might reach for a certain brush. In other words, I dont want to put any creative juices on pause to figure out how to enable some needed function of my gear. That just doesnt jive.

I'd take a camera that I have that sort of relationship with any day over a few more un-neccesary megapixels or frames per second.

Scotty_R · July 8, 2009

Flutist wrote:

I really wish I had the skill to get rid of some of the grain. I'm cool with grainy pics but this is not one of them (had my ISO up to far for the situation)

No need to worry about grain here...looks very natural and clean to me, but I'm also a partial to a little grain/noise in an image. Digital images can be cleaned up so much with noise reduction software that they sometimes take on a fake, plastic look that then gives skin a false, too smooth, plastic look and ruins the portrait for me. Very nice shot, Shannon--you've made a lot of good progress since Christmas!

Mitchell, your trick works!

Comments