Daughter portrait. Would appreciate any comments.

Mitchell

I'd love some comments on this picture. I seem to receive no feedback on my submissions when I post for comments on the Challenge board. Several people look, but no comments are posted on my pictures! I'm looking for constructive criticism and pointers to improve my amateur technique.

mitch

DavidTO

Mitchell wrote:

I'd love some comments on this picture. I seem to receive no feedback on my submissions when I post for comments on the Challenge board. Several people look, but no comments are posted on my pictures! I'm looking for constructive criticism and pointers to improve my amateur technique.

mitch

That's a shame you don't get comments. I'll have to watch out for you on the board.

First off, I'd say that it's a nice shot of a beautiful girl.

Personally, I'd like to see more natural color, meaning mostly more saturation.

Also, I find it a bit flat. Partly this is due to the heads-on flash, and partly to the fact that she looks to be backed up against the background. The detail in the speckling of the background makes the image overall lack a 3-dimensional quality. If you put her far enough away, the speckles would become a homogenous white background, which may not be any better. Anyway, I would find more compelling backgrounds, and work on setting her off against it, through the use of depth of field, making the background out of focus so that one's eye is drawn to her.

I, too, am looking to improve my amateur technique. No pro here, but that's my $.02!

gus

Mitchell to put it simply...some of us dont know enough about photography to pass constructive critique...such as myself. I wish i did & oneday may be able to.


Some can pass judgement & some make it up.

I really like dark photography so i really only comment on those.

Andy

Mitchell wrote:

I'd love some comments on this picture. I seem to receive no feedback on my submissions when I post for comments on the Challenge board. Several people look, but no comments are posted on my pictures! I'm looking for constructive criticism and pointers to improve my amateur technique.

mitch

hiya mitch...

first of all, really nice effort, and she's a beautiful girl i agree, the lighting is sort of flat - maybe invest in a 2nd slave flash setup, and have it off camera at an angle, to create some nice shadow, adding depth to her features. something i tried here with my own daughter

further separation from the bg is a must. also, a more interesting background would help, too. this portrait has the "dreaded straight" look, and that's just not as pleasing as other poses, imo. try being above her a little, so she's tilted a but upwards, and also have her at an angle maybe - to you or set off from the horizontal. experiment with different poses, settings... like a favorite chair maybe, with legs draped over it. or a regular seat, where she's sitting backwards, facing the rear of the chair... anything to "get out of the ordinary."

i also would like to see either full bw or full saturation, but not in between.

keep up the good work, and i hope you find this helpful

gus

andy wrote:

hiya mitch...

first of all, really nice effort, and she's a beautiful girl i agree, the lighting is sort of flat - maybe invest in a 2nd slave flash setup, and have it off camera at an angle, to create some nice shadow, adding depth to her features. something i tried here with my own daughter

further separation from the bg is a must. also, a more interesting background would help, too. this portrait has the "dreaded straight" look, and that's just not as pleasing as other poses, imo. try being above her a little, so she's tilted a but upwards, and also have her at an angle maybe - to you or set off from the horizontal. experiment with different poses, settings... like a favorite chair maybe, with legs draped over it. or a regular seat, where she's sitting backwards, facing the rear of the chair... anything to "get out of the ordinary."

i also would like to see either full bw or full saturation, but not in between.

keep up the good work, and i hope you find this helpful

Thats what i meant to say mitchell....I just couldnt get it out.

DavidTO

andy wrote:

maybe invest in a 2nd slave flash setup, and have it off camera at an angle, to create some nice shadow, adding depth to her features.

Andy, I have the digirebel and a canon 420ex. If I were to get another flash, would another 420ex do? Or should I get its more powerful cousin. Also, is there a 2 camera flash how-to site that you know of? Or book?

hutchman

Mitch,

I struggle with people shots - they drive me nuts. So I am following this thread as a learning tool!

Thanks for posting.

Hutch

fish

DavidTO wrote:

Also, I find it a bit flat. Partly this is due to the heads-on flash, and partly to the fact that she looks to be backed up against the background.

Yep...I agree. As someone who's only recently begun to use multiple flashes and umbrellas (thanks again, shay!), I can definitely tell you to stay away from the on-camera flash as the only source of portrait lighting.

I've also become a fan of high contrast lighting, which is a heck of a lot of fun to play with and there's really no way to do it incorrectly. Here's one of my recent attempts:

Mitchell

andy wrote:

hiya mitch...

first of all, really nice effort, and she's a beautiful girl i agree, the lighting is sort of flat - maybe invest in a 2nd slave flash setup, and have it off camera at an angle, to create some nice shadow, adding depth to her features. something i tried here with my own daughter

Thanks for all the great feedback!! This is just what I've been looking for. I actually did shoot this with an off camera flash along with the fill flash on the camera. I guess I need to place her further away from the backdrop. What distance would you recommend?

I also did some photoshop work to try to makethis more interesting. I suspect I just made it look bland. I was going for a pastel look. Below are the original color and an attempt at just B&W. Which do people prefer?

mitch

Stan

Just for another angle on the shot, the face looks washed out compared to the hair, the pastel you were looking for could have been spot on on your monitor but if it's calibration is off, then what you post after post processing will be off for others. The original looks would look good with a little increase in saturation. This is often the case when posting to the web

humungus wrote:

Some can pass judgement & some make it up.

I lkike that statement. You like what you see, if you find fault...

ginger_55

How about the pose? Same expression, but her head resting on crossed arms, or however they do it.

g

Tony

Mitchell wrote:

I'd love some comments on this picture. I seem to receive no feedback on my submissions when I post for comments on the Challenge board. Several people look, but no comments are posted on my pictures! I'm looking for constructive criticism and pointers to improve my amateur technique.

mitch

Very pretty girl. A few things to try with your current setup. Have her turn to the side just a little bit and try bouncing your flash off a white ceiling (or just use available light from above). Then - you can use a white piece of foam core or cardboard held below here face (and out of the picture) to try to add some fill in the shadows but not entirely, since the shadows are what will give her face some depth. You can actually play with the light and see how it falls across her face. It's hard to explain - so here's an example of my youngest son - no flash, digital rebel, available light and a reflector - notice how the shadow gives his face some depth (and that he had his t-shirt on backward when I grabbed him to take this shot!! )

gus

Stan wrote:

I lkike that statement. You like what you see, if you find fault...

Im not with you stan...what do you mean ?

ginger_55

Mitchell wrote:

I'd love some comments on this picture. I seem to receive no feedback on my submissions when I post for comments on the Challenge board. Several people look, but no comments are posted on my pictures! I'm looking for constructive criticism and pointers to improve my amateur technique.

mitch

As another comment, totally different from what I have said before, or what anyone has said.

You title that Daddy's little Girl, then you desaturate it, not always a bad thing, kind of an old timey look, IMO, and just have the straight innocent pose.

In most cases, I don't think that would win awards. But not knowing what you were going for, the photo does have merits.

The child looks very innocent, in addition to the inherent very innocent pose, there is the old timey lack of color saturation. She is just looking at you. I would guess her to be older than the picture would show a modern world.

As far as the light is concerned. I am going to have to get me one of those reflector things, too. Suggestions people. Are there any that fold up to put in your bag, for inside do I just go get some poster board?

But as far as the light is concerned, it is so simple, non existent in an art form.

Well, I am not sure but that you DID capture daddy's little girl, and in a unique way. I would prefer the pose to be less like a school "nonportrait", but this pose, well, it might be serving you well.

Any comments on this idea? We know a good portrait, we all have posing and lighting ideas, but the feeling of a father for his child on the edge of maturity, well, what does one think?

(I, uh, slutted mine up a bit. I was an idiot (and younger, much), but I liked to see them pose. This is different, I think I like it.)

ginger

Mitchell

ginger_55 wrote:

As another comment, totally different from what I have said before, or what anyone has said.

You title that Daddy's little Girl, then you desaturate it, not always a bad thing, kind of an old timey look, IMO, and just have the straight innocent pose.

In most cases, I don't think that would win awards. But not knowing what you were going for, the photo does have merits.

The child looks very innocent, in addition to the inherent very innocent pose, there is the old timey lack of color saturation. She is just looking at you. I would guess her to be older than the picture would show a modern world.

As far as the light is concerned. I am going to have to get me one of those reflector things, too. Suggestions people. Are there any that fold up to put in your bag, for inside do I just go get some poster board?

But as far as the light is concerned, it is so simple, non existent in an art form.

Well, I am not sure but that you DID capture daddy's little girl, and in a unique way. I would prefer the pose to be less like a school "nonportrait", but this pose, well, it might be serving you well.

Any comments on this idea? We know a good portrait, we all have posing and lighting ideas, but the feeling of a father for his child on the edge of maturity, well, what does one think?

(I, uh, slutted mine up a bit. I was an idiot (and younger, much), but I liked to see them pose. This is different, I think I like it.)

ginger

Ginger,
Thanks for the comments. I was going for the "old timey" look with the desaturation in the final picture. I found the color too saturated and the B&W too flat. I suspect everyone is correct that it is my lighting that is flattening this shot.

The pose is too posed. You may be right, I look at the picture and see that I captured "Daddy's little girl" who is trying to be a big girl while awaiting the birth of her new sister in 3 weeks.

Thanks for all the comments. I hope this thread has been helpful for everyone, not just me.

mitch

DavidTO

Mitchell wrote:

I captured "Daddy's little girl" who is trying to be a big girl while awaiting the birth of her new sister in 3 weeks.

Thanks for all the comments. I hope this thread has been helpful for everyone, not just me.

mitch

I know the feeling. Every picture of my daughter has special significance, whether it's a keeper or not. The bond a father has with a daughter is truly amazing. Just the other day she IM'd me with "I love you like the earth, the wind and the stars." Wow.

As for the comments, it has helped me, I love reading others comments about photos, and that's what makes this place so great. We do need to be careful to also appreciate the work, the sentiment, the value that each photo has. As dkapp said, we don't want to tear every image apart, sometimes you just want to share without getting a photography lesson. But it is true that every photo is an opportunity to learn.

Stan

Humungus wrote:

Im not with you stan...what do you mean ?

Sorry Humungus, not personal. If photography is an art form, then anyone is entitled to an opinion, your comment some can pass judgement was good in that some contributions are worth more than others technically but anyone can give an opinion on why a picture works or can find fault with the shot and comment on it

gus

Stan wrote:

Sorry Humungus, not personal. If photography is an art form, then anyone is entitled to an opinion, your comment some can pass judgement was good in that some contributions are worth more than others technically but anyone can give an opinion on why a picture works or can find fault with the shot and comment on it

Not taken personal...just like to know what is ment. I just dont offer tech advice as i dont know any. I assumed they were asking for that. If they were asking for opinions as to how people feel about a shot then im full of them.

I simply really like dark photography & am not into portraits or dogs so i rarely comment on them.

Michiel de Brieder

Hey Mitchell,

while I *like* the saturated version here, I see more potential with those twinkling eyes I would definitely choose a close crop almost every time with your daughter. She has a very open, honest and smiling face that has a great potential for close crops with some curls to line the face up. I'm no expert but there you have it The B/W doesn't add to the photo in my opinion...

Well I hope that does help some