First paid child portrait session:)

lizzard_nyc

ok here they are--finally:D. I loved the whole process from start to finish.
I see these as a marriage between "people" and "street/pj"--some candid portraits. Sometimes little Owen would stop and smile for me when he noticed the camera--so I took advantage of those moments too.
I want your input and I'm also going to post some different ones in Street/pj for their input as some are more "street/Pj"--if you see both sets, you will see what I mean.

Any input is appreciated.

1.


2.



3.



4.



5.



6.

indiegirl

Hi Liz!

So, I'll start by congratulating you on your first paying child portrait gig. I know how much you prepared for this and how excited you were. Your attitude about kid photography/candid work is spot on, so please take my feedback in a positive spirit.

Here are some things I can tell by looking at this set:

1. He was having fun
2. You were not getting in the way of his natural activity
3. He felt at ease with you
4. You were having fun

Here are some other things I can infer:

1. It was mid-day or close to it
2. You didn't know when or whether to use a flash
3. You didn't slow him down at all to shoot

I'm not in love with the post processing. The shadows are harsh and the colors are just not quite right. I can see where you want to go but these look as if they are over-processed. Are you post processing this much to correct exposure or to create a style? I'm guessing both

I'd also opt for an environment with more natural shade (read: entirely in the shade) if I were shooting at this time of day. I like metering in Program, turning to Manual and underexposing the background a few stops. Then use the flash to light the subject. Try it sometime.

Look for "containers" to put kids who are busy and quick--a tree, a stump, a rock, bucket, etc so you can really work on engaging them while you are shooting. It doesn't have to be pose-y and lame, it can just be a chance for you to act really goofy for them to look at you and express their fascination with your "tricks" in the form of a great look.

Hope this is helpful in some way Keep shootin' and having fun!

Jesse

What did the family think?

kidzmom

Love #4 and #5! Yes, lighting looked harsh and I would probabally have opted for no flash. I personally don't like central, small, "pupil flash-points" as much as large, natural catchlights..otherwise you definately did an awesome job capturing the child's true self! Nice work!

lizzard_nyc

indiegirl wrote: »

Hi Liz!

So, I'll start by congratulating you on your first paying child portrait gig. I know how much you prepared for this and how excited you were. Your attitude about kid photography/candid work is spot on, so please take my feedback in a positive spirit.

Here are some things I can tell by looking at this set:

1. He was having fun
2. You were not getting in the way of his natural activity
3. He felt at ease with you
4. You were having fun

Here are some other things I can infer:

1. It was mid-day or close to it
2. You didn't know when or whether to use a flash
3. You didn't slow him down at all to shoot

I'm not in love with the post processing. The shadows are harsh and the colors are just not quite right. I can see where you want to go but these look as if they are over-processed. Are you post processing this much to correct exposure or to create a style? I'm guessing both

I'd also opt for an environment with more natural shade (read: entirely in the shade) if I were shooting at this time of day. I like metering in Program, turning to Manual and underexposing the background a few stops. Then use the flash to light the subject. Try it sometime.

Look for "containers" to put kids who are busy and quick--a tree, a stump, a rock, bucket, etc so you can really work on engaging them while you are shooting. It doesn't have to be pose-y and lame, it can just be a chance for you to act really goofy for them to look at you and express their fascination with your "tricks" in the form of a great look.

Hope this is helpful in some way Keep shootin' and having fun!

Jessie
What did the family think?

Thanks for the detailed post indiegirl!

First not upset at the C&C, I wanted it.
Two, I am not looking down on the posed shots, it's just not something I'm comfortable getting out of people. I think I would be too uptight trying to get posed shots and it would be awkward, so I go with what I'm comfortable doing.

I hardly ever ever use flash, one I only have a crappy on camera flash and I want to do with only available light, but he light was sooooo harsh and his face was in the shadows half the time, so I bit the bullet--but yea my flash shots don't work--do over!

I gave the family the option to meet me at either 9:00 a.m. or 5:00 p.m.--they chose 9:00 a.m. and we started shooting at 9:30, but was bright as hell. Next time I will pick two locations one that I know has lots of shade and one that is like this and will call them up the morning of and say meet me at option a or b. There was crazy dappled light here.

I still have much to learn Indigirl, thanks for your comments and I will refer back to them on my next shoot whenever that is. I did love it though, I mean truly, I was excited the entire previous night and throughtout the shoot and processing them--it was an awesome experience--AND I got paid for it --unreal.

Can't wait for the next one.

The family will see them in a few days. I shot these yesterday so I'm still processing some. Also you are right the processing was both because I overdo the crazy processing, always have, sometimes I can contain myself, but also because the light was so crazy bright and the shadows so deep that this was the only way some of these would work.

indiegirl

lizzard_nyc wrote: »

Thanks for the detailed post indiegirl!

First not upset at the C&C, I wanted it.
Two, I am not looking down on the posed shots, it's just not something I'm comfortable getting out of people. I think I would be too uptight trying to get posed shots and it would be awkward, so I go with what I'm comfortable doing.

I get you. I'm not talking about posing, per say. I'm talking about containing, careful containing

lizzard_nyc

kidzmom wrote: »

Love #4 and #5! Yes, lighting looked harsh and I would probabally have opted for no flash. I personally don't like central, small, "pupil flash-points" as much as large, natural catchlights..otherwise you definately did an awesome job capturing the child's true self! Nice work!

You are so right about the central flash points--hate them! I tried to clone them out (first time I'm really using flash) and guess what, he looked like Damien's brother, very evil.

Lesson learned on flash--I went against my gut and normally I'm so anti flash! live and learn.

I'm glad #4 and #5 work for you.

i will post back later this week and let you guys know what the parents thought of the entire set of 65 some shots. I just realized, the majority is b&w, lol--well they knew that going in so .

Thank you for commenting

lizzard_nyc

indiegirl wrote: »

I get you. I'm not talking about posing, per say. I'm talking about containing, careful containing

yes I know what you mean. Especially since I'm sore as hell today from all the climbing on equipment and chasing down basketball courts etc. Contain is the operative word. Lesson learned again, lol. Got a feeling I have more to learn than I thought. Hopefully I can keep learning as I go.

adbsgicom

Congrats!!! I really love the first two!

NeilL

Liz, I left a comment in the S&PJ forum.

Neil

reyvee61

Something is just a bit off I concur with indiegirl and her thoughts on this but I can see the fun of the shoot as well. I will almost never use on-board flash with the kids because in my experience it always changes the look on their faces while indoors so I would never consider for outdoors either though it's probably bright enough outside to offset the flash.

Will return to read the results of the shoot as long as the parents are happy which I'm sure they will be :-)

black mamba

You know, Liz, I'm usually not one to comment on technique when it comes to other's works.....paticularly in an arena where I have no expertise at all. That's certainly the case here. There are plenty of other folks who can be a lot more helpful in that regard.

What stands out to me, as I've watched your growth as a photographer, is your willingnees.....maybe dogged determination....to stay true to your chosen course. You've got the guts to experiment....absolutely necessary to foster real growth....yet, throughout the whole process, you remain focused on developing your own style of shooting, accompanied by a PP approach that compliments that style.

Inevitably, as your growth process matures, there'll be plenty of adjustments to your " bag of tricks ". What I'm sure of, however, is that you know where you want to go and you won't rest until you get there. Following you along the trail, as you progress, is a ride I'm not going to miss.

Tom

Flyinggina

black mamba wrote: »

What I'm sure of, however, is that you know where you want to go and you won't rest until you get there. Following you along the trail, as you progress, is a ride I'm not going to miss.

Tom

Virginia

RYSCoach

indiegirl wrote: »

I'd also opt for an environment with more natural shade (read: entirely in the shade) if I were shooting at this time of day. I like metering in Program, turning to Manual and underexposing the background a few stops. Then use the flash to light the subject. Try it sometime.

I was reading through this thread and just to try this out I went out and tried this and know I better understand why I see photographers with flashes out on otherwise bright days.

I took shots of my gas grill which is on my porch in the shade with my well lit yard in the background. Without the manual adjustment you suggested, the background looked bleached out but with the adjustment, the background was good and the flash lit up the foreground...

lizzard_nyc

adbsgicom wrote: »

Congrats!!! I really love the first two!

Thanks Andrew:D.

lizzard_nyc

reyvee61 wrote: »

Something is just a bit off I concur with indiegirl and her thoughts on this but I can see the fun of the shoot as well. I will almost never use on-board flash with the kids because in my experience it always changes the look on their faces while indoors so I would never consider for outdoors either though it's probably bright enough outside to offset the flash.

Will return to read the results of the shoot as long as the parents are happy which I'm sure they will be :-)

Thanks for commenting.
I think maybe the bright light did offset the flash somewhat (thank goodness)--but lesson learned on that one.

lizzard_nyc

black mamba wrote: »

You know, Liz, I'm usually not one to comment on technique when it comes to other's works.....paticularly in an arena where I have no expertise at all. That's certainly the case here. There are plenty of other folks who can be a lot more helpful in that regard.

What stands out to me, as I've watched your growth as a photographer, is your willingnees.....maybe dogged determination....to stay true to your chosen course. You've got the guts to experiment....absolutely necessary to foster real growth....yet, throughout the whole process, you remain focused on developing your own style of shooting, accompanied by a PP approach that compliments that style.

Inevitably, as your growth process matures, there'll be plenty of adjustments to your " bag of tricks ". What I'm sure of, however, is that you know where you want to go and you won't rest until you get there. Following you along the trail, as you progress, is a ride I'm not going to miss.

Tom

That is one hell of a compliment--thank you Tom

Now to wait for the next paid gig. In the meantime I will continue shooting and doing what I love to do.

I really appreciate your encouraging words.


Liz

lizzard_nyc

Flyinggina wrote: »

Virginia

Thank you Virginia.
I know you have also been following my progress so it means a lot.

lizzard_nyc

RYSCoach wrote: »

I was reading through this thread and just to try this out I went out and tried this and know I better understand why I see photographers with flashes out on otherwise bright days.

I took shots of my gas grill which is on my porch in the shade with my well lit yard in the background. Without the manual adjustment you suggested, the background looked bleached out but with the adjustment, the background was good and the flash lit up the foreground...

Yes exactly. I did notice that some of the better shots of the portriats and up close shots did better with the flash--but I just don't like how obvious the flash looks, especially the pupils. With how I'm shooting, I can't see chasing the kid around with reflectors while also trying to get him to forget about me and do his thing. I will just have to learn to work the natural light better. Darn that flash! Glad you went out and experiment though.

Hackbone

Good beginnings. Digital photography tends to be flat appearing. I think alot of these could be helped quite abit by raising your black point in your raw settings or in photoshop. Try it on #1,2, 3, & 6 and see what happens.

damonff

#4 is gorgeous

Patti

You continue to be my brave hero Liz. You go for it and follow your path as Tom so eloquently stated ( a lovely post btw Tom). I actually really like #5. Have you tried cropping out the OOF greeny bit on the left? Compositionally I like it, shadow of the lattice and all.

misterb

Nice shots.

My only 2 questions/comments would be that:

There has to be a "happy medium" between the red/blue shirt in #1 and #5.. and go with that.

The faces are kinda blown out in #2 and #3- but *perfect* in #4!

What lens are you shooting these with..??

lizzard_nyc

Hackbone wrote: »

Good beginnings. Digital photography tends to be flat appearing. I think alot of these could be helped quite abit by raising your black point in your raw settings or in photoshop. Try it on #1,2, 3, & 6 and see what happens.

Forgive the delay in responding--crazy busy.

I will tweak the images further before handing over the photos on Sunday.

Thank you for the tip!

lizzard_nyc

damonff wrote: »

#4 is gorgeous

Happy to see you and thank you.

lizzard_nyc

Patti wrote: »

You continue to be my brave hero Liz. You go for it and follow your path as Tom so eloquently stated ( a lovely post btw Tom). I actually really like #5. Have you tried cropping out the OOF greeny bit on the left? Compositionally I like it, shadow of the lattice and all.

You are making me blush woman!

I did crop the OOF bar a bit, but I will give it a go with the whole thing cropped out and see. I liked it as is, but I did not try and see what it would look like without.


Thank you Patti.

lizzard_nyc

misterb wrote: »

Nice shots.

My only 2 questions/comments would be that:

There has to be a "happy medium" between the red/blue shirt in #1 and #5.. and go with that.

The faces are kinda blown out in #2 and #3- but *perfect* in #4!

What lens are you shooting these with..??

Hi Misterb,
Did you mean #1 and 6--I'm guessing you did. I went crazy on the PP for #1 and #6 is more natural for sure.

The light was overwhelmingly bright that day-but I tend to go the high contrasty, I cant' seem to fight it .

The 40-150mm kit lens for most of the shots and my pancake 25mm prime for a few. Love my Olympus lenses, even the kit ones.

NeilL

To add to suggestions made about balancing fill flash and ambient, here is an idea from NK Guy's Flash Photography with Canon EOS Cameras (http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/) -

>>>

It’s possible to fake FEC if your camera and flash combination lacks the ability. It basically involves fiddling with your camera’s manual ISO setting, and is more useful for people using film. You can’t simply adjust exposure compensation because doing so affects both ambient exposure settings and flash exposure settings simultaneously.

The workaround is thus to do the ambient metering first and locking it into place by going into manual metering mode. This puts both the shutter speed and aperture under your direct control. Once that’s done you can manually alter the ISO setting of the camera (if your camera supports this, as the vast majority of EOS cameras do).

If you lower the ISO rating you’re essentially tricking the camera into producing more flash output - halving the ISO results in one stop more flash output. If you raise the film speed rating/ISO setting then the camera will produce less flash output - doubling the ISO results in one stop less flash output.

The drawbacks to this technique are obvious and threefold. First, it’s rather fiddly since altering ISO isn’t a commonly changed thing and thus the interface isn’t the easiest to use. Second, you have to be certain to set the ISO value back to its correct setting when you’re done or else you risk messing up the exposure settings for the rest of the roll in the case of film. And third, you can’t really use it if your camera lacks manual ISO controls altogether.

>>>

I found that an interesting technique which could produce an interesting effect and I'm going to try it sometime.

Neil

reese.leblanc

I like them all (including your other set) but for some reason, I LOVE #5. I guess it's the lattice of light on his face along with his expression. :shrug: Whatever it is, I really like it!

shniks

#5 is just awesome. Love it!

Jwar

love #4 and #5. Thanks for sharing your first session. I've got my first family session coming up and the lesson i learned from your sharing, do what i know or feel comfortable with!

lizzard_nyc

Jwar wrote: »

love #4 and #5. Thanks for sharing your first session. I've got my first family session coming up and the lesson i learned from your sharing, do what i know or feel comfortable with!

glad you got something out of this Jwar. I had so much fun that I think it helped considerably. I did not get nervous and just enjoyed, it took a few shots to get going but it worked out just fine.

Good luck to you on your first session.