Sure you see this all the time..

MI MomMI Mom Registered Users Posts: 12 Big grins
edited March 3, 2013 in People
I'm sure you see posts on here all the time about moms starting photography businesses; well, here is another one. lol I hope you take a few moments to look over my photos. I would love to get some constructive feedback from someone other than baby's family members. I am just a beginner and I know I still have a lot to learn. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you guys! :D

IMG_5860-4-L.jpg

IMG_5856-L.jpg

IMG_6008-2-L.jpg

IMG_6078-4-L.jpg

IMG_6115-L.jpg

IMG_6150-L.jpg

IMG_5020-4-L.jpg

IMG_5091-L.jpg

IMG_5203-2-L.jpg

IMG_5339-L.jpg

IMG_5067-2-L.jpg

IMG_4442-2-L.jpg

IMG_4540-2-L.jpg

IMG_4729-2-L.jpg
Christina - MI Mom's Work on Facebook

Comments

  • FoquesFoques Registered Users Posts: 1,951 Major grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    what makes people think that selective coloring is appealing? I don't get it.
    Arseny - the too honest guy.
    My Site
    My Facebook
  • MI MomMI Mom Registered Users Posts: 12 Big grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    Foques wrote: »
    what makes people think that selective coloring is appealing? I don't get it.

    Thanks for your "constructive feedback" your rude comment is really helpful!
    Christina - MI Mom's Work on Facebook
  • Dooginfif20Dooginfif20 Registered Users Posts: 845 Major grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    MI Mom wrote: »
    Thanks for your "constructive feedback" your rude comment is really helpful!

    I think that what he was trying to say was the selective color method does not work with #2. In all honesty it kind of creeped me out. First off welcome to the forum. You will get a lot of help here for sure! Here are my thoughts.

    First numbering the photos makes it a lot easier to leave comments.

    Second your watermark is a little irritating. I suggest making it smaller and maybe in a corner somewhere.

    1. It is a very good shot. By looking at the catchlights I see two light sources. I would turn one of them down a little to get better fall off. You can do that or move the source closer and put the back edge so that it is perpindicular to the subject.

    2. Loose the selective color. It does not work here. Perhaps if the baby was sleeping and laying on her side the flower alone in pink may have worked. The eyes really creep me out.

    3. Good shot with great emotion, but the tilt doesnt work for me. Also I think there is too much competing for my eye. You have a frilly tutu, a flowery headband, and then the text on the blanket. The last thing I looked at was the baby.

    4. Very sweet! The crop is a little funky, but I like it!

    5. I would toss this one. I really dont think this is your best here.

    6. This one is my favorite! I love the colors and her emotion.

    7. Its a great shot. Once again the crop is a tad funky. Also they look mad. They have a cute little baby and the only thing I see is two parents pissed off.

    8. Haha very cute, but good lord he looks scared!

    9. I would toss this one as well. The lighting is horrible. It is very straight on and the fact that the catchlights are in the middle of the eye makes me think its a popup flash.

    10. Good shot. A little flat and maybe in need of some warmth, but good shot!

    11. Love it. Great emotion. Great connection. Light is ok, but can be better. Looks like the lights need to be higher.

    12. Ok shot. Flat lighting and too close to the background. Have her come a couple steps forward and the background will get more bokah and then she will pop even more.

    13. Good shot. Flat lighting and too cold. Adding a touch of warmth would be killer here.

    14. Haha aint nothing like a drooling baby! This one just needs a touch of warmth and you would be golden!

    I hope these help. Please dont take anything offensive as I am just expressing my opinion. You know what they say about opinions.
    My Facebook
  • MI MomMI Mom Registered Users Posts: 12 Big grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    Dooginfif20 wrote: »
    I think that what he was trying to say was the selective color method does not work with #2. In all honesty it kind of creeped me out. First off welcome to the forum. You will get a lot of help here for sure! Here are my thoughts.

    First numbering the photos makes it a lot easier to leave comments.

    Second your watermark is a little irritating. I suggest making it smaller and maybe in a corner somewhere.

    1. It is a very good shot. By looking at the catchlights I see two light sources. I would turn one of them down a little to get better fall off. You can do that or move the source closer and put the back edge so that it is perpindicular to the subject.

    2. Loose the selective color. It does not work here. Perhaps if the baby was sleeping and laying on her side the flower alone in pink may have worked. The eyes really creep me out.

    3. Good shot with great emotion, but the tilt doesnt work for me. Also I think there is too much competing for my eye. You have a frilly tutu, a flowery headband, and then the text on the blanket. The last thing I looked at was the baby.

    4. Very sweet! The crop is a little funky, but I like it!

    5. I would toss this one. I really dont think this is your best here.

    6. This one is my favorite! I love the colors and her emotion.

    7. Its a great shot. Once again the crop is a tad funky. Also they look mad. They have a cute little baby and the only thing I see is two parents pissed off.

    8. Haha very cute, but good lord he looks scared!

    9. I would toss this one as well. The lighting is horrible. It is very straight on and the fact that the catchlights are in the middle of the eye makes me think its a popup flash.

    10. Good shot. A little flat and maybe in need of some warmth, but good shot!

    11. Love it. Great emotion. Great connection. Light is ok, but can be better. Looks like the lights need to be higher.

    12. Ok shot. Flat lighting and too close to the background. Have her come a couple steps forward and the background will get more bokah and then she will pop even more.

    13. Good shot. Flat lighting and too cold. Adding a touch of warmth would be killer here.

    14. Haha aint nothing like a drooling baby! This one just needs a touch of warmth and you would be golden!

    I hope these help. Please dont take anything offensive as I am just expressing my opinion. You know what they say about opinions.

    Thanks for your reply, I appreciate it.
    Christina - MI Mom's Work on Facebook
  • QarikQarik Registered Users Posts: 4,959 Major grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    about selective color..photographer hate it, clients usually like it. it's really up to you though. I don't like selective color 90% of the time but in this case it is not so bad..almost works. Some good shots and some throw aways here. Technically I would bump the up exposures by a good 1/3 to 1/2 stop on most of these shots except for the last 3. As you probably realize your 1st 2 shots are your best.
    D700, D600
    14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
    85 and 50 1.4
    45 PC and sb910 x2
    http://www.danielkimphotography.com
  • MI MomMI Mom Registered Users Posts: 12 Big grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    About the selective color...I originally started with just the bow being pink. Then my husband chimed in and thought "it would look way better if you did the eyes too." Silly me for listening to him. I know some of the baby girl are a little cluttered, but what mom wants is what mom gets. I appreciate the comments. I did go back and change the warmth on a few pics and it really helped!! I knew something wasn't quite right buy wasn't sure what it was. Oh, and my watermark is not nearly as intrusive as it is in some of these pictures, I just had these saved like this and already re-sized so I didn't change it.
    Christina - MI Mom's Work on Facebook
  • FoquesFoques Registered Users Posts: 1,951 Major grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    grow a thicker skin.
    it is the internets. and learn to take negatives from people.. you'll get that much more than positives. again, it is the internets.

    you posted your amateur (yet, decent) work on the message board. If you don't like "bad" things being said about your work, why did you bother?

    People who post that stuff and then get bent out of shape because they disagree with negatives.. waste everyone's time.


    IMO, selective coloring is as close to ghetto as one can get.
    Arseny - the too honest guy.
    My Site
    My Facebook
  • MI MomMI Mom Registered Users Posts: 12 Big grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    Foques wrote: »
    grow a thicker skin.
    it is the internets. and learn to take negatives from people.. you'll get that much more than positives. again, it is the internets.

    you posted your amateur (yet, decent) work on the message board. If you don't like "bad" things being said about your work, why did you bother?

    People who post that stuff and then get bent out of shape because they disagree with negatives.. waste everyone's time.


    IMO, selective coloring is as close to ghetto as one can get.

    I'm not bent out of shape; in fact I mostly agree. I think having just the bow in color would have made for a better photo. I understand photographers hate selective coloring; however parents do like it. (even ones that don't live in the ghetto) I just thought the way you responded was pretty rude and you could have said things differently and got your point across much more effectively. I appreciate you changing your response and thanks for calling my photos decent. These are my first 3 attempts at portrait shots of people other than my family. I don't think they are that bad; do I think they are perfect? No, I know they are far from it. That's why I'm here; to learn from people who are more experienced than I. If you have any suggestions about lighting, positioning or editing I would love to hear it. Like the other poster commented about the warmth of a couple photos; I went and adjusted them and they look way better now. I'm just here to learn, that's all.
    Christina - MI Mom's Work on Facebook
  • Dooginfif20Dooginfif20 Registered Users Posts: 845 Major grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    One question I had is what are you using for a lighting source and what time of modifiers are you using?
    My Facebook
  • MI MomMI Mom Registered Users Posts: 12 Big grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    Dooginfif20 wrote: »
    One question I had is what are you using for a lighting source and what time of modifiers are you using?

    I have two front facing small soft box lights and one soft box hair light (with daylight CFL's). I have an external flash (Canon 430EXII). That's all I'm workin' with.
    Christina - MI Mom's Work on Facebook
  • Dooginfif20Dooginfif20 Registered Users Posts: 845 Major grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    Could you provide a picture of your setup as I am confused what you mean.
    My Facebook
  • MI MomMI Mom Registered Users Posts: 12 Big grins
    edited March 1, 2013
    Here is just a quick (not very great) shot of my "studio." Anything else you want to know? I can use any advice. Thanks.
    i-xrmXwXx-L.jpg
    I usually have the front lights facing just the baby, but I turned them towards the camera just for this photo.
    Also, on my external flash, I point it mostly up and have a omni-bounce diffuser over it.
    Christina - MI Mom's Work on Facebook
  • Dooginfif20Dooginfif20 Registered Users Posts: 845 Major grins
    edited March 2, 2013
    So I am curious why you are also using the external flash in this setup. I see you using on of those softboxes as a main and the other as a fill with the last as a rim/hair light, but dont see the value in adding the 4th light. You said these were shot with CFLs? Are they even possible to turn down the brightness? I think one of the problems is the lighting is too flat. Thats a result of having the same power out on both sides of the face. Try using just one light and line up the back edge of the softbox with the face of your subject so you get a nice wrap of light with good fall off.
    My Facebook
  • unique93unique93 Registered Users Posts: 69 Big grins
    edited March 2, 2013
    Angles are pretty good, but postprocessing could be better...somethink like this...some high key :D

    12323015.jpg
  • Dooginfif20Dooginfif20 Registered Users Posts: 845 Major grins
    edited March 2, 2013
    Honestly I think your edit is worse than the original
    My Facebook
  • unique93unique93 Registered Users Posts: 69 Big grins
    edited March 2, 2013
    I see now :D

    I don't have raw file, so i couldn't postprocess as I imagine :D

    Sorry for bad english :D
  • Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited March 2, 2013
    I think you're off to a good start.

    The one bit of advice I will chime in with, for close ups like the first two images, 30mm is a less than wonderful choice. For shots like that you want to be somewhere between 70mm and 105mm.

    Regards,

    Bryce
  • babowcbabowc Registered Users Posts: 510 Major grins
    edited March 3, 2013
    unique93 wrote: »
    Angles are pretty good, but postprocessing could be better...somethink like this...some high key :D

    12323015.jpg

    That's a BIG negative.
    She has the PP done quite well on the 1st.

    I don't think baby portraits are meant for high-key, rather something softer and closer to low-key if anything.
    -Mike Jin
    D800
    16/2.8, f1.4G primes, f2.8 trio, 105/200 macro, SB900.
    It never gets easier, you just get better.
  • unique93unique93 Registered Users Posts: 69 Big grins
    edited March 3, 2013
    Yes...i know...somethink like this is perfect for me :)

    http://www.nikolaradulovic.com/wp-content/uploads/sajt7.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.