Hodgepodge of faves from a BUSY fall! :)

urbanaries · November 13, 2007

As exhausted as I am after a crazy month of shooting and stressing, i've been neglecting the funnest part of the whole effort...sharing work with you guys!

Here's some of my faves from the last month or so. C&C always welcome, I learn so much from the amazingly talented folks around here! :ivar

1. From Katherine, my second HS senior client. One off camera flash outdoors.

2.

3. From a family session at the same park. Dad is in Afghanistan, this was for his Christmas present. He's coming home for two weeks for thanksgiving, and I'll have the pleasure of shooting his arrival at the airport if all goes well. :lust These are all natural light.

4. Indiana may not be Crested Butte, but.... :rofl(Oh and does anyone have CA like this with the 17-55 2.8 IS (with hood)? It doesn't bother me so much in this shot, but it's really really BAD lately.)

5. Casualty of a water fountain fight

6. They just love this one, the mom loved that I didn't try to force the older boy to not pout...and given the military family angle this was their chosen wall hanger!

7. My personal fave

8. A family shoot indoors this weekend, with 6 month old Cade. (If you've only shot newborns, hang in there, 6 month is the golden age! They sit up, crawl, and don't mind flash.

9.

10. This was two 580 EX's off camera and the 17-55 2.8.

11. And then when they turn 1, they can stand! These were from my fifth session with 13 month old Michael. I shot his mom's maternity photos over a year ago, time flies!!!

12.

Thanks for looking!!!

saurora · November 13, 2007

The problem when a photographer gets really GOOD is that they are too busy working to have time to post!!! Gosh, Lynne, these are fantastic and I wish you had more time to post, but I'm sure glad you are working so hard!!!

I love, love every single one of these, but my favorite of the bunch is #3. Of course, I love the story behind it, but I also love the interaction between mother and son and also where you placed your focus in this shot. You've had a great year so far!!!

Llywellyn · November 13, 2007

Wow, these are all fantastic. #9 just takes my breath away and makes me grin! Absolutely wonderful!

Thank you for taking time out of such a busy (and fruitful!) time to share.

JimW · November 13, 2007

Lynn,

These are really great. Love your style. #1 is a beautiful shot. Nose shadow could be softer, but that's just a quibble. Both 2 & 3 are great. On the "CA" on 4, do you mean chromatic abberration? Hmmm, not sure what CA is. I don't see any chromatic abberation. If it is, then my understanding is that a lens hood wouldn't prevent that anyway. (I could very easily be wrong) I have a couple of lenses that give me CA (fringing), but my 17-55 (2.8 Nikon) doesn't usually. My understanding is that CA is a function of using a non-apochromatic lens, and the different colors of light are not focusing on the same exact spot. So it's not the same as flare. If you mean something else by CA, please excuse me. Regardless, when it happens, it's really annoying, I agree.

Photo 8 is gutsy, shooting into the light like that with people facing away. I like it because it breaks the rules. Would be interested in your reasons/thinking behind opting not to use fill.

Photo 5 is exceptional, I think, because people don't take photos like that much. Many photogs would let the moment go by. I think it's cool that you captured it. Looks like one of those photos that will mean more to him/them in twenty years than now. Your processing enhances it. Nice.

Terrific work, thanks for sharing.

Jim

urbanaries · November 13, 2007

JimW wrote:

Lynn,

These are really great. Love your style. #1 is a beautiful shot. Nose shadow could be softer, but that's just a quibble. Both 2 & 3 are great. On the "CA" on 4, do you mean chromatic abberration? Hmmm, not sure what CA is. I don't see any chromatic abberation. If it is, then my understanding is that a lens hood wouldn't prevent that anyway. (I could very easily be wrong) I have a couple of lenses that give me CA (fringing), but my 17-55 (2.8 Nikon) doesn't usually. My understanding is that CA is a function of using a non-apochromatic lens, and the different colors of light are not focusing on the same exact spot. So it's not the same as flare. If you mean something else by CA, please excuse me. Regardless, when it happens, it's really annoying, I agree.

Photo 8 is gutsy, shooting into the light like that with people facing away. I like it because it breaks the rules. Would be interested in your reasons/thinking behind opting not to use fill.

Photo 5 is exceptional, I think, because people don't take photos like that much. Many photogs would let the moment go by. I think it's cool that you captured it. Looks like one of those photos that will mean more to him/them in twenty years than now. Your processing enhances it. Nice.

Terrific work, thanks for sharing.

Jim

Jim, thanks for your thoughtful critique. On the CA, I do mean purple fringing, I see it in the upper parts of the trees. I didn't think the lens hood helped or hurt just wanted to give the most info possible just in case:D. It's also apparent in this outdoor shot i did recently on the mom's left arm. I didn't catch it in retouching, but the client emailed me and asked me why her arm is glowing in their 11x14, so it's obvious to her. I printed using smugmug Auto and wonder if it exacerbated the problem. (I do realize I'm probably hijacking my own thread.

)

On #8, I started out testing a few with the backlit natural light, but ended up doing most with the flashes firing. I ended up liking this particular one more although I shared a variety with the client. The silhouette/backlighting just seemed more like a "stumbleupon" moment, and while the flashed ones were more accurately exposed, they felt more staged, if that makes sense.

urbanaries · November 13, 2007

saurora wrote:

The problem when a photographer gets really GOOD is that they are too busy working to have time to post!!! Gosh, Lynne, these are fantastic and I wish you had more time to post, but I'm sure glad you are working so hard!!! I love, love every single one of these, but my favorite of the bunch is #3. Of course, I love the story behind it, but I also love the interaction between mother and son and also where you placed your focus in this shot. You've had a great year so far!!!

thanks Susan! the mom loved that one too and printed a big one for their family "reading nook." If anyone is interested, it is the "Dangerous Book for Boys," her boys are obsessed with it. I was really glad to be introduced to the book for my little guy, he'll be ready for it sooner than I think! I appreciate your great feedback!!!

urbanaries · November 13, 2007

Llywellyn wrote:

Wow, these are all fantastic. #9 just takes my breath away and makes me grin! Absolutely wonderful! Thank you for taking time out of such a busy (and fruitful!) time to share.

thank you Kerry! I am so glad your shoot went so well! Thanks for the feedback on 9, I have been trying to get more energy and emotion out of my parents, so I was really happy with that one!

JimW · November 13, 2007

Lynn,

Just to follow up. Okay, fringing (CA). Yes, I see it on the Mom's arm in your link. I don't know for sure, but I doubt the printing has any effect one way or the other. It's in the file. In case you're using CS3 and ACR, were you aware that ACR now has a lens correction tab, with a section that claims to reduce chromatic aberration? It's the 6th tab over. I don't know yet how well it works, but it's worth a try. Also, there is a third party program somewhere that attempts to reduce it. I swear I saw a link here on dgrin somewhere for it. Maybe someone will jump in and say.

Getting an email from a client who noticed it is a bummer. I empathize. Plus the added work of having to do something about it. Good luck.

Jim

Scott_Quier · November 13, 2007

Lynne,

It's really nice to see you posting again. I was begining to wonder what had happened to you. Nice to find out that it's just that you are so busy shooting!

Now for some no sugar-coated critic (watch out

)

#1 This is just a cool shot, very gritty. I'm thinking the young lady will love this. I wonder what the parents think. A small nit - if you had raised the flash a bit more, that "horrible"

nose shadow would have been much more complimentary. Or, lowered it and shot it through a modifier of some sort. Did you use your ST-E2 on this shot? If so, how well does it work for you outdoors?

#2 This one is very nice - I like how you have the hands doing something rather than just hanging there. I'm thinking I would have put her a little more to right of the frame, but rules are made to be broken and you did it with impact here.

#3 This is #2 in my book (we'll get to #1 in a minute!). There is NOTHING in this photo that is not spot-on. Both the boy and his mother are gorgeous, the interaction between them is real, and there's a secondary focus (the book). Wonderful shot!

#4 This one does nothing for me - oh well. But, we all know that my artistic muscles are still in development. As for the CA - the hood is going to do nothing to mitigate CA. I'll test mine in the next day or so and let you know what I find.

#5 - This is an unusual portriat; almost has a feel of a snapshot - which I think it really was. And, what that means is that your snapshots are usually better than my concerted efforts!

#6 This one just confuses me. I don't understand the story you are attempting to communicate.

#7 Same thing - sorry.

#8 There is no way this would work as a color image. The B&W conversion was the absolutely right thing to do with this. And, like JimW said, a really gutsy shot!

#9 This is, by far, my favorite of the group. The expression on the child's face, the joy in the faces of the parents, the secondary interest of the intimate setting (I'm assuming this is a bedroom) - it all comes together in a great image. Then your processing is like the icing on the cake. Simply wonderful.

#10 Interesting image, but from a technical standpoint. I'm trying to figure out where the lights were placed. It appears the main is about 45 degrees from axis, to camera right and the second one above and behind the camera, shooting/boucing off ceiling. But, there's a some light on the child's right face that makes me think there's one about 90 degrees to axis to camera left - but that could be a window. Anyway, nice off-camera lighting. I'm guessing the ST-E2 is really doing you well.

#11 Nice framing. Where did all the pumpkins come from - did you buy them for the shoot or did you find them on location somewhere? Just curious.

#12 This is a nice portrait. The focus has me a little bemused - it appears the pumpkin stem is in focus, but so does his hair but not his eyes. Hmmm ... Curious..

JimW wrote:

Lynn,

Just to follow up. Okay, fringing (CA). Yes, I see it on the Mom's arm in your link. I don't know for sure, but I doubt the printing has any effect one way or the other. It's in the file. In case you're using CS3 and ACR, were you aware that ACR now has a lens correction tab, with a section that claims to reduce chromatic aberration? It's the 6th tab over. I don't know yet how well it works, but it's worth a try. Also, there is a third party program somewhere that attempts to reduce it. I swear I saw a link here on dgrin somewhere for it. Maybe someone will jump in and say.

Getting an email from a client who noticed it is a bummer. I empathize. Plus the added work of having to do something about it. Good luck.

Jim

ACR in CS2 also has this capability and, in CS2 it does a credible job. I've not yet had opportunity to play with it in CS3 - when I have time

photogmomma · November 13, 2007

Wow! You've been busy in a *really* amazing way! Every time you post, your photos just amaze me...

I wish I had time to really critique, but my absolute favorites are too many to count. (I actually started to, but quit!

!)

I love the mom and her boys - may not be CB, but still amazing and gorgeous! (And MUCH greener than here!) I love Cade and Michael's shoots. Wow!!!

Just gorgeous, Lynne!

System · November 13, 2007

geat photos, lynn!-

jeffreaux2 · November 14, 2007

Hey busy bee,

I will try to return the fun of a detailed critique, but it seems that mostly I will be bragging on these!!!

1. It has been mentioned already about the shadow of the nose, and this immediately caught my eye. I think a second flash at a greatly reduced power, or a cleverly placed reflector could have helped.
2. She looks a tad uptight, and I bet you could make it pop more
3.Very nice
4. I like the trees, the light, the color, but the subjects spread out in this one don't really grab me. I had issues with CA on my 85mm at the church wedding I sent you the link to. It isn't neccessarily because of shooting into the sun, but more or less eveident at places where there are very high contrast.....a highlight adjacent to a black or shadow. Mine showed where the white collar of the grooms shirt met his very very dark blue or black jacket. I knew the 85mm was suceptable to this, but this was the first time it crept up on me. You can use the CA tools in lens correction in lightroom to minimize it after the fact. I don't know that there is an in camera fix.
5. LOve IT!!!

6.I like the subjects spread out here. The fact that you told a bit of their story makes it work better than it might if we didn't know.
7 Excellent..........excellent!!!
8 I find the wreaths a little distracting, but I love the classic feel this one has. Very nice!
9 I love this shot. Everything about it.
10 I don't mind the shadows on this cute little face at all. What's not to like?
11 Love the colors, but it screams square crop to me.
12 My Favorite!! He is sitting like a teenager.....that cracks me up. Color and sharpness win me over on this one.

Thanks for sharing these, they are awesome.......and it's good to know you didn't get swallowed up somewhere out there.

Now.......where's briggie?

DavidS · November 14, 2007

These are all so nice I hate to pick one out that I especially like, but the one of the boy and the mom with the book is awesome.

STLMach1 · November 26, 2007

Very nice work! There are many really great captures here!

Michael

urbanaries · November 27, 2007

I just realized as this bumped up again that I hadn't replied ot a lot fo the really helpful and awesome feedback that people took time to give me....whoops!!!

Scott_Quier wrote:

Now for some no sugar-coated critic (watch out )

Ready Freddy!:D

#1 This is just a cool shot, very gritty. I'm thinking the young lady will love this. I wonder what the parents think. A small nit - if you had raised the flash a bit more, that "horrible" nose shadow would have been much more complimentary. Or, lowered it and shot it through a modifier of some sort. Did you use your ST-E2 on this shot? If so, how well does it work for you outdoors?

Thanks for the suggestion. I think I need taller light stands! I also had a bare flash and maybe a diffuser (lumiquest softbox or sto-fen, both of which I have...DUH) would have helped? Oh and this one wasn't purchased by either the parents or the girl...guess it didn't go over well! Ah well, it's still my favorite from the shoot. It's interesting how some clients say they don't want the "traditional, stiff photos" or "cheesy-smiley shots"...but that's what they end up buying. Got to produce a variety to cover myself.

#2 This one is very nice - I like how you have the hands doing something rather than just hanging there. I'm thinking I would have put her a little more to right of the frame, but rules are made to be broken and you did it with impact here.

If they would have bought this one (which they didn't, again) my plan was to crop her more to the right based on the size.

#3 This is #2 in my book (we'll get to #1 in a minute!). There is NOTHING in this photo that is not spot-on. Both the boy and his mother are gorgeous, the interaction between them is real, and there's a secondary focus (the book). Wonderful shot!

Aw, thanks! It is now a very sizeable print in their reading nook. Makes it all worth it!

#4 This one does nothing for me - oh well. But, we all know that my artistic muscles are still in development.

No worries! Win some, lose some...I liked the light coming thru the trees and the arc of the three subjects.

#5 - This is an unusual portriat; almost has a feel of a snapshot - which I think it really was. And, what that means is that your snapshots are usually better than my concerted efforts!

Thanks, I think...!

#6 This one just confuses me. I don't understand the story you are attempting to communicate.

Hmm, not sure I know how to explain this one? I was just looking for opportunities to capture the three of them in unconventional ways. The fact that two of them were joyous and one was pouting gave it some interest, I think.

#7 Same thing - sorry.

Brotherhood?

#8 There is no way this would work as a color image. The B&W conversion was the absolutely right thing to do with this. And, like JimW said, a really gutsy shot!

Thanks, you're right it doesn't look good in color! I thought this one had a more arty, voyeuristic feel (in a good way, not seedy) than the ones that were more properly lit/exposed.

#9 This is, by far, my favorite of the group. The expression on the child's face, the joy in the faces of the parents, the secondary interest of the intimate setting (I'm assuming this is a bedroom) - it all comes together in a great image. Then your processing is like the icing on the cake. Simply wonderful.

THANKS!! I see a lot of sloppiness in the framing/processing, but it seems to resonate despite that.

#10 Interesting image, but from a technical standpoint. I'm trying to figure out where the lights were placed. It appears the main is about 45 degrees from axis, to camera right and the second one above and behind the camera, shooting/boucing off ceiling. But, there's a some light on the child's right face that makes me think there's one about 90 degrees to axis to camera left - but that could be a window. Anyway, nice off-camera lighting. I'm guessing the ST-E2 is really doing you well.

Wow, you reverse engineered my lighting to a T! Setting up lights for a moving child is an inexact science, at least for me. The limitations of the transmitter re: line of sight also affected my placement, and the shadows aren't ideal. But the more I use off camera, the less I care about exact placement, because I typically like the dynamics better than front-on light (especially indoors), even if the results aren't as precise. Do you find the same?

#11 Nice framing. Where did all the pumpkins come from?

They have lots of them at the pumpkin patch.

#12 This is a nice portrait. The focus has me a little bemused - it appears the pumpkin stem is in focus, but so does his hair but not his eyes. Hmmm ... Curious..

Imprecise focus, you caught me!!!

I loved his expression and body language but you're right, the focus point looks like it was on the plane of his hair rather than his eye.

Thanks again Scott, albeit belated, for your detailed perspective!

urbanaries · November 27, 2007

Thanks George, David and Michael!

(I'm getting to you, Jeff!!! )

Scott_Quier · November 27, 2007

Wow, you reverse engineered my lighting to a T! Setting up lights for a moving child is an inexact science, at least for me. The limitations of the transmitter re: line of sight also affected my placement, and the shadows aren't ideal. But the more I use off camera, the less I care about exact placement, because I typically like the dynamics better than front-on light (especially indoors), even if the results aren't as precise. Do you find the same?

RE: reverse-engineering the lighting - I have lots of practice. I have learned so much from COPYING other's work - even your's:D

Yes. The off-camera lighting, for events and moving subject (like the baby) don't need precise lighting. I feel the viewer understands that things are dynamic and don't expect to see things perfect.

schmoo · November 27, 2007

Lynn, it's great to see that business is booming for you! You've got to have a ton of happy clients with shots like these. I absolutely adore your high-key style and the emotions you capture in your subjects. Excellent work and although it takes away from your Dgrin time I'm so happy for your success!

JimW · November 27, 2007

Lynne,

Earlier in this thread, I said that my 17-55 2.8 nikon lens doesn't give me CA (fringing). Of course, the very next time I used it I noticed fringing.

So, in the interest of full disclosure of my previous lie

, I offer this example. On the right is a detail of the capture. Then I decided to try ACR's tab for chromatic abberation correction. The result is on the left. I think it improved it signicantly, but could not eliminate it.

There, I fessed up and feel better now.

Jim

Hodgepodge of faves from a BUSY fall! :)

Comments