Some people
I don't usually photo people other than family, but these are some I took not to long ago with my new camera I am learning (Canon EOS rebel t2i). Comments/critique are much appreciated. Thank you.
DL http://www.artlife.us
DL http://www.artlife.us
0
Comments
2. Great smile but a bit of a 'floating head'
3. Just too soft for me this one and the highlights just too blown.. Looks like she's looking down and smiling at something.. It may have been nice to see what.
Just IMHO of course. Thanks for sharing.
It does make me wonder if these forums are the right place for me to be posting.
DL http://www.artlife.us/
I went back and looked at the original photos, and for #2 that is pretty much the original frame. For the little girl, I did want to convey just dreamy smile, what she is doing or the reason are irrelevant to me, that is just a personal preference I guess. For the jockey this is a debate I had from the beginning, did the post processing make it more interesting/better or not? While I do like how the crowd looks in the processed image, in retrospect perhaps the shot was just fine the way it was. Below is the original shot, right out of the camera and I think I am going to change this in my gallery.
thank you for the input. DL http://www.artlife.us/
I'd like to see what #1 looks like if it's cropped a bit closer to the jockey's head and shoulders and cuts out the other jockey on the right.
For #2 I'd try a square crop to eliminate the empty space to the right. Maybe this is just me, but I've always thought that the subject should be on the opposite side of the frame from the direction they're looking. If they're on the left and are looking left, it looks like they've got their faces up against a wall or something. But again, that may just be me. Oh, and there's a tiny strip of white on the left edge of the frame; I'd get rid of that by cropping or cloning. Somehow it's just a tad distracting.
#3 is absolutely perfect just the way it is. No cropping, no color adjustment, no processing needed - it's beautiful.
Thank you for the insight, very good suggestions. Yes I saw that white- that should be gone, and I do agree about the empty space. Interesting thought on #1, I will have to see about trying some crops. Thanks.
DL http://www.artlife.us
I like the original of the jockeys and I can see what you were trying to achieve in post. I like the fact there are two of them as well, seems more candid, peeking into someone else's conversation. The disconnect is that you've blurred items on the same plane as those that are in focus. Take the whip. It's the same distance from the lens as the jockey's chest, one is in focus the other is VERY blurred. My eye knows this is wrong and stops me enjoying the image.
If you want to focus the viewers eye on the jockeys you could darken the background perhaps, your eyes are naturally drawn to the light part of an image. Be as light handed as you can..
Good point about the plane of focus. I also agree about the background. In the original I still tend to feel it is too busy and detracts from the subject. Various crops don't really work to my satisfaction.
I definitely want input, good or bad. I need to know how others view my work. Thanks
DL http://www.artlife.us
created a quick mask in PS of the jockeys so I could mask them out.
new layer which I painted in solid black above the grass level.
used 20% fill over the grass.
Dropped back the opacity of the black layer to the point that I felt was not to black but that killed a lot of the detail.. I think that technique works pretty well..The other option would be to fill the background with grass perhaps..
please visit: www.babyelephants.net
DL http://www.artlife.us
actually probably will not darken, just blur and maybe something else. the crowd is also in the sunshine so have to watch the darkening. I want them visible, just not distracting. I will play around with it.
your link is so sad.
please visit: www.babyelephants.net