it seems to me the depth of field is SO narrow, and the focus is not quite on the right spot on the first two. The first one seems on her arm. I couldn't tell about the second. The third looks dead on to me--focused on the child's eyes.
Seems it would have been a bit of an easier shot if you closed down the lens just a bit, if the light/ISO would allow.
I just got a 85mm 1.8 prime and am struggling with the same thing, so that is what my eye is drawn to these days.
The eye contact really makes the third shot stand out. Have you tried cropping the top 1/6th off the third image? Right now there is just dead space there. Try a 4:5 ratio crop and only remove space from the top.
it seems to me the depth of field is SO narrow, and the focus is not quite on the right spot on the first two. The first one seems on her arm. I couldn't tell about the second. The third looks dead on to me--focused on the child's eyes.
Seems it would have been a bit of an easier shot if you closed down the lens just a bit, if the light/ISO would allow.
I just got a 85mm 1.8 prime and am struggling with the same thing, so that is what my eye is drawn to these days.
Lovely shots. Nice BW treatment.
I agree about the focus on the first two. I don't know why that happens with the auto spot-focus. Maybe I just need to be more careful. I was hoping that the three could be a series, but I don't think the first two are good enough, and I don't think they're different enough.
The eye contact really makes the third shot stand out. Have you tried cropping the top 1/6th off the third image? Right now there is just dead space there. Try a 4:5 ratio crop and only remove space from the top.
I don't have enough experience with printing my photos to know how to crop for standard frame sizes. I can't afford a lot of custom frame jobs. Would the 4:5 ratio crop maintain a standard print size?
Canon 5d mii, Canon 50mm f/1.8, 35mm 1.4L, 70-200mm IS L
Yeah, I should have thought of that. I shot at ISO 160. Would a higher ISO still put the background in complete black?
Your exposure was fine. The shirt is blow out a little but I don't think that detracts from this image. I believe what they are saying is to raise your ISO so you could stop down your lens and increase your DOF. What shutter speed and aperture were these taken at?
A higher ISO will not change your exposure, only your shutter speed. The background would look thae exact same as it does now.
For the last shot I think it looks good with only the babys face in sharp focus. The babys eyes are te main focus and the mother is more of background for that image.
A 4:5 ratio will get you a standard 8x10 print size.
Your exposure was fine. The shirt is blow out a little but I don't think that detracts from this image. I believe what they are saying is to raise your ISO so you could stop down your lens and increase your DOF. What shutter speed and aperture were these taken at?
A higher ISO will not change your exposure, only your shutter speed. The background would look thae exact same as it does now.
For the last shot I think it looks good with only the babys face in sharp focus. The babys eyes are te main focus and the mother is more of background for that image.
A 4:5 ratio will get you a standard 8x10 print size.
Ok this was an exercise in humility. Had I taken the time to actually think about ISO, I would have been able to come up with the same conclusion regarding the exposure and depth of field. And you'd think I could do the math of a 4:5 ratio = 8x10 print.
I shot it at f/4 and 1/400. I really had plenty of room to decrease the aperture to increase the DOF. f/8 would have put them both in focus.
Canon 5d mii, Canon 50mm f/1.8, 35mm 1.4L, 70-200mm IS L
Since we are throwing opinions around....
I think they are very nice photographs, and the fact that the child is in sharper focus creates an interest that would be lost if everything in the frame were in focus. The lighting is dramatic and directional. All this to say you have gotten yourself a few dynamic photos.
Comments
it seems to me the depth of field is SO narrow, and the focus is not quite on the right spot on the first two. The first one seems on her arm. I couldn't tell about the second. The third looks dead on to me--focused on the child's eyes.
Seems it would have been a bit of an easier shot if you closed down the lens just a bit, if the light/ISO would allow.
I just got a 85mm 1.8 prime and am struggling with the same thing, so that is what my eye is drawn to these days.
Lovely shots. Nice BW treatment.
Las Cruces Photographer / Las Cruces Wedding Photographer
Other site
SmugMug Technical Account Manager
Travel = good. Woo, shooting!
nickwphoto
I agree about the focus on the first two. I don't know why that happens with the auto spot-focus. Maybe I just need to be more careful. I was hoping that the three could be a series, but I don't think the first two are good enough, and I don't think they're different enough.
I don't have enough experience with printing my photos to know how to crop for standard frame sizes. I can't afford a lot of custom frame jobs. Would the 4:5 ratio crop maintain a standard print size?
email: mark@markleonardimaging.com
My Gear
Yeah, I should have thought of that. I shot at ISO 160. Would a higher ISO still put the background in complete black?
email: mark@markleonardimaging.com
A higher ISO will not change your exposure, only your shutter speed. The background would look thae exact same as it does now.
For the last shot I think it looks good with only the babys face in sharp focus. The babys eyes are te main focus and the mother is more of background for that image.
A 4:5 ratio will get you a standard 8x10 print size.
SmugMug Technical Account Manager
Travel = good. Woo, shooting!
nickwphoto
Ok this was an exercise in humility. Had I taken the time to actually think about ISO, I would have been able to come up with the same conclusion regarding the exposure and depth of field. And you'd think I could do the math of a 4:5 ratio = 8x10 print.
I shot it at f/4 and 1/400. I really had plenty of room to decrease the aperture to increase the DOF. f/8 would have put them both in focus.
email: mark@markleonardimaging.com
I think they are very nice photographs, and the fact that the child is in sharper focus creates an interest that would be lost if everything in the frame were in focus. The lighting is dramatic and directional. All this to say you have gotten yourself a few dynamic photos.
I think they look great!!
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
And if they were mine, I would still like them!
The lighting is just amazing, and I looove that last one.
And that is my opinion.
Darling baby, BTW.