My First Try - Innocence

Jenn

Here is my first try. It's called, "My Daughters Innocence". My daughter is getting married next week and these are photos of things when she was a baby, and a toddler, and young child.. her foot print when she was born.. the title to her birth certificate ....her stuffed animals and a can of paper flowers she made me for mothers day one year, and the corner of a jewelry box she made and covered it with seashells. The angel was a christmas present shortly after she was born.. It' called "Heaven's Helper", and they are all wrapped in her wedding veil that she's going to wear next week. You can see the flowers, pearls, and jewels on the headpiece of the veil. This one was hard for me to do. I don't know if the photo works or not for this challenge, but I can't let it go just yet.

AndMan

Jenn
Congratulations on your daughter's up coming wedding.

I can understand why this image is important to you but, for me, it doesn't work for the challenge in its current form. Given our mutual desire for success / failure criteria I will endeavour to be specific. Please bear in mind that these are only my opinions and you may wish to take them with a large pinch of salt and others will no doubt have their own views.

• I like the concept and think that you have the potential for an interesting and touching image.
• In my opinion the image is too busy overall and the two cut outs, whilst important to you in the story of your daughter, are, in their current form, intrusive and draw my eye away from the rest of the image.
• The jewellery box, being cut off by the frame, is a distraction which actually leads my eye out of the image, as do the paper flowers in the lower rh corner.
• The light on to the angel seems ok if a tad harsh but there are large blown highlights on the veil and the light on the stuffed toys seems distinctly harsh, I presume from a direct flash.
• I would suggest retrying with fewer, repositioned, objects and/or from a wider angle so you can include more of each element. I would also suggest trying to change the lighting, perhaps bouncing the flash.
• You may also want to try softening the image in post to give it a more ethereal feel.

Hope this helps.

One again congrats to you and your daughter.

Peter

travelways

Congratulations to your daughter.

About the image, I totally agree with the previous comments.

Jenn

AndMan wrote: »

Jenn
Congratulations on your daughter's up coming wedding.

I can understand why this image is important to you but, for me, it doesn't work for the challenge in its current form. Given our mutual desire for success / failure criteria I will endeavour to be specific. Please bear in mind that these are only my opinions and you may wish to take them with a large pinch of salt and others will no doubt have their own views.

Specifics does help ... some questions below.

AndMan wrote: »

I like the concept and think that you have the potential for an interesting and touching image.
In my opinion the image is too busy overall and the two cut outs, whilst important to you in the story of your daughter, are, in their current form, intrusive and draw my eye away from the rest of the image.The jewellery box, being cut off by the frame, is a distraction which actually leads my eye out of the image, as do the paper flowers in the lower rh corner.

My problem is everything is a cut out on the right side of the image and is inserted into the veil portion of the image. The main image is the angel/veil/jewelry box(es)... there's another jewelry box that is covered by the stuffed toys. I don't know how to do this to get the effect I want.

Here is a link to the original , and here is a link to a 2nd option. I have other photos of the stuffed toys/footprints, etc. that I didn't upload yet.

AndMan wrote: »

The light on to the angel seems ok if a tad harsh but there are large blown highlights on the veil and the light on the stuffed toys seems distinctly harsh, I presume from a direct flash.

The light is just a flash that's on my camera. I can adjust it via editing, pretty much, but I don't know how much because what looks good to me doesn't look good to you.

AndMan wrote: »

I would suggest retrying with fewer, repositioned, objects and/or from a wider angle so you can include more of each element. I would also suggest trying to change the lighting, perhaps bouncing the flash.
You may also want to try softening the image in post to give it a more ethereal feel.

I can insert the objects from the individual photos of the stuffed toys fairly easily and make them look like they were part of the image, I just don't know how many. By ethereal.. do you mean a bit out of focus?

AndMan wrote: »

Hope this helps.

yes!

AndMan wrote: »

One again congrats to you and your daughter.
Peter

thanks

lizzard_nyc

Hi Jenn,
Ok my take.
I don't see innocence so much as clutter.

WIthout your description I'm lost. For example, I have no way of knowing why the seashell encrusted jewelery box means innocence to you --now I know it's because your daughter made it as a child etc.
I have no way of knowing why the veil is there, is it yours, your mothers etc. and why is it mixed in with kids stuff and a figurine? All of these make sense to you, but without your story, the viewer is a little lost.

Also the lighting. Try shooting in a brightly lit place without flash, it's just too harsh.

EDIT: I like the idea behind it btw--just not working with this shot IMO and yes congratulations on your daughter's upcoming wedding.

Joie

I thought of Trace Adkins' song "Then They Do" when I saw your photo:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-SAP8BFNkQ

Jenn

lizzard_nyc wrote: »

Hi Jenn,
Ok my take.
I don't see innocence so much as clutter.

WIthout your description I'm lost. For example, I have no way of knowing why the seashell encrusted jewelery box means innocence to you --now I know it's because your daughter made it as a child etc.
I have no way of knowing why the veil is there, is it yours, your mothers etc. and why is it mixed in with kids stuff and a figurine? All of these make sense to you, but without your story, the viewer is a little lost.

Also the lighting. Try shooting in a brightly lit place without flash, it's just too harsh.

EDIT: I like the idea behind it btw--just not working with this shot IMO and yes congratulations on your daughter's upcoming wedding.

Well.. the idea is to show the things she played with as an innocent child and compare them to who she is now.. a young woman getting married. I just don't know how to get there.

Jenn

Joie wrote: »

I thought of Trace Adkins' song "Then They Do" when I saw your photo:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-SAP8BFNkQ

acckkkk!! Now I'm a puddle of mush :cry .. I couldn't get past the first chorus! <sniff>

ghinson

Here's one suggestion. Try laying the birth certificate out (whole) on a nice surface, use one stuffed animal or memento to prop up the lace somehow, and shoot the whole thing with a really shallow depth of field, just catching part of the name, the date of birth and parts of the veil in focus. Leaving everything else soft and barely lit. Try shooting it with a tripod and natural window light from the side if possible. This picture would say what you're trying to say, without the distractions. I think the emotion of the event makes you, as a mother, want to turn the picture into an entire scrapbook, but then that fails to capture that emotion in the picture.

Jenn

ghinson wrote: »

Here's one suggestion. Try laying the birth certificate out (whole) on a nice surface, use one stuffed animal or memento to prop up the lace somehow, and shoot the whole thing with a really shallow depth of field, just catching part of the name, the date of birth and parts of the veil in focus. Leaving everything else soft and barely lit. Try shooting it with a tripod and natural window light from the side if possible. This picture would say what you're trying to say, without the distractions. I think the emotion of the event makes you, as a mother, want to turn the picture into an entire scrapbook, but then that fails to capture that emotion in the picture.

ok .. interesting idea... but I don't want to actually photo her birth certificate with her name on it and then post it on the internet. It would show her birth certificate number information that is at the top above her name and I don't want to publish her name in the photo, either. Ideas?

ghinson

I can understand that.

If you wanted to try it, it might be possible to make the DOF shallow enough that you can only read "birth certificate" and not a name. Think about those macro wedding rings on the bible shots that are so trendy:

http://mommylife.net/archives/2009/10/25/wedding%20rings.jpg

Just an idea.

Jenn

ghinson wrote: »

I can understand that.

If you wanted to try it, it might be possible to make the DOF shallow enough that you can only read "birth certificate" and not a name. Think about those macro wedding rings on the bible shots that are so trendy:

http://mommylife.net/archives/2009/10/25/wedding%20rings.jpg

Just an idea.

nice... I don't know how to set my camera to do something like that.

sorry.. that's probably a dumb question...

lizzard_nyc

Jenn wrote: »

nice... I don't know how to set my camera to do something like that.

You can also blurr things out in post processing.

ghinson

Jenn wrote: »

nice... I don't know how to set my camera to do something like that.

http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-get-shallow-depth-of-field-in-your-digital-photos

http://digital-photography-school.com/depth-of-field-video-tutorial

Here's some starters (that whole site, by the way, has some excellent education material on it).

Jenn

ghinson wrote: »

http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-get-shallow-depth-of-field-in-your-digital-photos

http://digital-photography-school.com/depth-of-field-video-tutorial

Here's some starters (that whole site, by the way, has some excellent education material on it).

hmm I guess I need to dig out my camera booklet that tells me how to do that. I have no idea how changing all the settings it has changes the photos.

sunflowerstudio

Jenn wrote: »

hmm I guess I need to dig out my camera booklet that tells me how to do that. I have no idea how changing all the settings it has changes the photos.

Getting us to explore the reaches of our camera is a big point of the forum. I think you got a lot of useful critique from a set of accomplished photographers. As always, with the critiques, it's up to the photographer to decide what they want to accomplish with their photographs. There's no one answer.

So the advice you're getting is appropriate for "is this a good photo for the 'innocence' challenge?" but may not be the right advice for a lot of other answers (including, for example, what your daughter would like).

Jenn

2nd try - innocence
Paper Flowers - 1


Paper Flowers - 2

kidzmom

Nice! I like where you are going on the innocence theme with the paper flower shots...but definately turn down your flash (or better yet OFF). Get some nice natural, soft window light (without direct sunlight-- just bright window light from a northern window). The flash is causing a big glare on the front of the pot and also very harsh shadows behind the flowers. When you find softer light those problems will diminish. This definately says innocence to me. Congrats on your daughter's upcoming wedding!

Jenn

kidzmom wrote: »

Nice! I like where you are going on the innocence theme with the paper flower shots...but definately turn down your flash (or better yet OFF). Get some nice natural, soft window light (without direct sunlight-- just bright window light from a northern window). The flash is causing a big glare on the front of the pot and also very harsh shadows behind the flowers. When you find softer light those problems will diminish. This definately says innocence to me. Congrats on your daughter's upcoming wedding!

The effects are on purpose. The original photo is ok, but it pops when I added the effects to it. I added some posterization and threshold effects along with adjusting levels, hue/saturation, contrast and added inversion minus one effect to the 2nd image.

Here is the original... it has no effects or adjustments on it. I kind of like the shadow behind it. Gives it some depth.

SeascapeS

Jen - the effects are okay, but usually you want to try to avoid shadows like that. They are distracting and not very flattering in a shot. There are times when shadows are appropriate and fun, but normally not on a wall behind the subject. If you don't have an external flash, try shooting in natural light with your camera flash off. Lighting is probably one of the most difficult things to master in photography. I'm still working on it.

Jenn

SeascapeS wrote: »

Jen - the effects are okay, but usually you want to try to avoid shadows like that. They are distracting and not very flattering in a shot. There are times when shadows are appropriate and fun, but normally not on a wall behind the subject. If you don't have an external flash, try shooting in natural light with your camera flash off. Lighting is probably one of the most difficult things to master in photography. I'm still working on it.

At first I didn't like the shadow, but after I looked at it for a bit, I think it ads to the photo especially when I put some effects on the image, like I did below. A second look at the shadow just now .. it looks like a horsey... a puppet shadow!

dnie

Try using a tissue or fabric softener sheet over your flash if you have to use your flash. You will still get light, but not the harsh brightness and hard shadows.

Jenn

dnie wrote: »

Try using a tissue or fabric softener sheet over your flash if you have to use your flash. You will still get light, but not the harsh brightness and hard shadows.

That's a good idea. Hadn't thought of trying that. thanks.