That is why I am asking here because it doesn't really look natural or like anything I have seen
First of all, her subjects were very young, and she was sharply focused on their eyes, but babies and young children have proportionately larger eyes than do adults thus contributing to their cutness. She also lightened or used a light source to focus a lot of light on the children's faces..and while this will tend to lighten the face...it makes the eyes sparkle...look at her last photo, the baby's face is almost white.
Go here for an explanation of why babies, and young children appear to have larger eyes...because they do...
Read on if you want more information on how the pros manipulate faces for portraits.
A couple of years ago, I attened an Epson Print work shop with Vincent Versace. A renowned photographer with many kudos.
One of the demonstrations that he did was to show how he does his portraits.
First he would cut out the face...with a selection tool, then erase all of the important parts, like the eyes, nose holes, lips, and eyebrows...as these are the focal points of the photograph and must remain sharp, if possible. He would then blur and color the face...or what was left of it...this gives skin tone and smooths out the rough spots. Then he combines the layers and blends in the cut outs...nose holes, eyebrows, lips and finally the eyes...so all of these features appear sharp. Then he does something that I hadn't thought of...he used a morph tool or similar and enalarges the eyes (if they need it) 10 to 15 percent. This makes the subject more appealing. And he tells us that in all magazine work...covers etc. that this is standard practice...along with lengthing legs and narrowing waists. (no wonder girls can't live up to magazine images I'm thinking.)
Google Vincent Versace and click on gallery, people you know, then view photo 27...it is the one that he used to do the demonstration...same subject anyway and notice how he lightened the area above the cheak bones and around the eyes...it gives them pop. This appears to be a common practice of his, see his other photos.
While the photographer here may or may not have used any of these techniques, it is apparent that she used the light well and focused on the eyes with a very sharp lens. The last photo is almost devoid of skin color...and has very blues eyes. This along with remembering that children's eyes are large for the size of there faces makes for some very good photos.
Okay, enough of this tome.
*************************************
Remember, no one may want you to take pictures, but everyone wants to see them.
Ed
Remember, no one may want you to take pictures, but they all want to see them. Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Comments
First of all, her subjects were very young, and she was sharply focused on their eyes, but babies and young children have proportionately larger eyes than do adults thus contributing to their cutness. She also lightened or used a light source to focus a lot of light on the children's faces..and while this will tend to lighten the face...it makes the eyes sparkle...look at her last photo, the baby's face is almost white.
Go here for an explanation of why babies, and young children appear to have larger eyes...because they do...
http://vision.about.com/od/childrenvision/f/babyeyesize.htm
Read on if you want more information on how the pros manipulate faces for portraits.
A couple of years ago, I attened an Epson Print work shop with Vincent Versace. A renowned photographer with many kudos.
One of the demonstrations that he did was to show how he does his portraits.
First he would cut out the face...with a selection tool, then erase all of the important parts, like the eyes, nose holes, lips, and eyebrows...as these are the focal points of the photograph and must remain sharp, if possible. He would then blur and color the face...or what was left of it...this gives skin tone and smooths out the rough spots. Then he combines the layers and blends in the cut outs...nose holes, eyebrows, lips and finally the eyes...so all of these features appear sharp. Then he does something that I hadn't thought of...he used a morph tool or similar and enalarges the eyes (if they need it) 10 to 15 percent. This makes the subject more appealing. And he tells us that in all magazine work...covers etc. that this is standard practice...along with lengthing legs and narrowing waists. (no wonder girls can't live up to magazine images I'm thinking.)
Google Vincent Versace and click on gallery, people you know, then view photo 27...it is the one that he used to do the demonstration...same subject anyway and notice how he lightened the area above the cheak bones and around the eyes...it gives them pop. This appears to be a common practice of his, see his other photos.
While the photographer here may or may not have used any of these techniques, it is apparent that she used the light well and focused on the eyes with a very sharp lens. The last photo is almost devoid of skin color...and has very blues eyes. This along with remembering that children's eyes are large for the size of there faces makes for some very good photos.
Okay, enough of this tome.
*************************************
Remember, no one may want you to take pictures, but everyone wants to see them.
Ed
Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Ed
When processing eyes, I've found that you're better using dodge/burn techniques to increase contrast and overall depth of the orbs.
Here's a quickie:
I didn't do any PS to the eyes....just the way it happened.
My equiment: Nikon D50, Nikon D300, SB-600, 30mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8
WEBSITE
BLOG