Family Portrait Session

RBrogenRBrogen Registered Users Posts: 1,518 Major grins
edited October 17, 2009 in People
Had a session yesterday and it was a bit on the chilly side and heavy overcast making it dark and dreary but I think we got some decent shots. Here's one from the shoot. C&C welcome.

682906925_VN95V-L.jpg
Randy Brogen, CPP
www.brogen.com

Member: PPA , PPANE, PPAM & NAPP

Comments

  • heatherfeatherheatherfeather Registered Users Posts: 2,738 Major grins
    edited October 16, 2009
    Lovely! Love your separation with the background and the pose is perfect!

    (One question: Did you do something with the teeth? The girl's almost look black and white. I usually will lighten the yellows, but they appear grey instead of white.)

    But seriously lovely photo. I bet this one is on their wall for a loong time.
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited October 16, 2009
    Seems that 135 is being put to good use!! Nice shot - the separation really is splendid. All natural light?
  • RBrogenRBrogen Registered Users Posts: 1,518 Major grins
    edited October 16, 2009
    Thanks Heatherfeather and divamum.

    Heather: I'll have to check her teeth. I did do some minor whitening and if I remember correctly the computer crashed on this pic so it may have left something there.

    Divamum: yes mam..that 135 worked out well....I have to think about a 50mm now though because I didn't realize how far back I would actually have to be to shoot these..luckily I was able to find enough space.
    Randy Brogen, CPP
    www.brogen.com

    Member: PPA , PPANE, PPAM & NAPP
  • HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited October 17, 2009
    My only problem with this is the clothing. You have a low key bkg with white shirts. They really needed a darker top with this bkg and it would have looked much better. The white shirts would go better with a higher key like a beach setting. But you gottta go with what they wear.
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited October 17, 2009
    RBrogen wrote:
    Divamum: yes mam..that 135 worked out well....I have to think about a 50mm now though because I didn't realize how far back I would actually have to be to shoot these..luckily I was able to find enough space.

    Hmmmm.... 85 1.2? You can sell the 135 to me to help pay for it :D

    (j/k. In fact, the length on the 135 is the one thing that keeps me on the fence about it and since my 100 f2 is pretty darned good and 1/3 the price, I'm trying to curb my lust for that lens... for the time being, at least. mwink.gif I'm not sure how long I'll be able to hold out! )
  • RBrogenRBrogen Registered Users Posts: 1,518 Major grins
    edited October 17, 2009
    Thanks for replying Hackbone and yes I agree. Yes we are at the mercy of the client from a lot of perspectives. We had never been to this location so it was all shot from the hip. Add to that we had already rescheduled 2 other times because of inclement weather and overall I think it worked out well. I'll post a couple more shots in a bit.

    Divamum: well sorry I can't help you keep your lens lust at bay because I LOVE this glass. I shot this at f/2.5, 1/5000. There is about 2' behind them before the drop off to the water and I was very excited when it looked like I was able to get the DOF spot on and the bokeh on the background really worked out well. And yes 100% natural lighting..my favorite situation.
    Randy Brogen, CPP
    www.brogen.com

    Member: PPA , PPANE, PPAM & NAPP
Sign In or Register to comment.