Various photos from last couple shoots

[Karebear98]

Here are three photos from the last couple shoots I have done. I have experimented with other post processing techniques, so not only am I looking for comments on the shot composition and lighting itself, I am also looking for how you feel the post processing technique looks with the shot.

Thank you for all help and as always, it is greatly appreciated.

Kara

[groovyone]

#1 love the kid. The bright blank sky keeps pulling my eyes to it, but the kid looks great.

#2 Great shot. Love it! The kid is adorable!

#3 Love the color and framing. The kid looks a little soft, not sure if that was the processing. Were the parents nervous with him being that close to the pool? heh

I dig your logo. Very cool.

[Karebear98]

Thanks so much. #3 has this glowy effect added that changes a lot about the sharpening, it makes it dreamy looking.

Ha...nah it's like a foot of water and we had trouble getting him close to it at first. I was more worried about my camera...it was splashing pretty good.

Thanks on the logo...my awesome graphic designer friend designed it. She's building her portfolio...win win!

[rab3rd]

You have really made some improvements.

[mrsrice22]

Kara, these are coming along great! I really like the idea behind the 3rd one, the coloring is fantastic but I would scale back just a tad on the softness/opacity (personal preference).

2nd shot is missing some footsies :)

1st I think I would like to see in color.

Doing great, proud of how much you've accomplished in such a short time!

[Karebear98]

Well I weathered the storms and I feel like I am really turning a corner. I don't even like to go back and look at my first shoot! It makes me laugh a little. lol

[Karebear98]

Missing footsies...definitely noted.

[mrsrice22]

Haha, they weren't THAAAAT bad, lol!

[mrsrice22]

and btw, you beat me to the Rice brand/logo! I love it!

[naranjita]

I like #1, and that toothless grin in #2 is precious.
I think the "ethereal" look needs to be pulled back a little in #3, but that could just be a matter of personal taste. :)

[Ernst-Ulrich Schafer]

Ok Kara here's my take.

#1 I'm not digging the skin tones at all. Background, Mom's arm, the cutting off of limbs are all very distracting.

#2 Your overexposed, there's really no light in the eyes, almost the rackoon eye effect from the over the head light, cutting off the legs and clothing.

#3 Again clothing, background, to much space around the subject here, the little one is looking away from the light and he has a missing foot.

Personally with these you have step back into your snapshot mode. ;-( You've gotten better than this.

[Karebear98]

Ernst...hmmm I'm not seeing the raccoon eye effect you are seeing. Nor do I see the image as overexposed...might be the processing? Not being defensive just really not seeing it. I will look at the color version again and check to see if it exists in it? I do see some hard light coming through on the right side of the face. I believe the processing is increasing the effect.

With number one, this is a popular pose...the over the shoulder shot...do you have a more specific suggestion to make it better using this same type of shot?

With regards to picture number 3...I don't understand the "too much space around the subject" Can you clarify? Would it have been better had I had him on the left side of the frame facing the light and framing it differently? There was also a matching pool to the right of the frame...the mirror version of this pool.

I understand about the cutting off the limbs...old habits die hard...I need to continue to work on that.

[Ernst-Ulrich Schafer]

Yes, over the shoulder portraits of little ones are quite popular. The skin is not attractive and there needs to be more light in the eyes. The highlights in the background and those shadows don't look very good to me and it takes away from the child.

The raccoon eyes effect is when the eyes are in the shadows and it's usually caused by overhead light. The one on the left is the most noticeable one in image #2. The eyes need more light in them. The detail on the right side is blown out, not much but it is still there. Highlights have detail if our exposure is correct. Yes, I know your playing with some new actions, but those things won't make a bad photo any better.

On #3 Yes, it would have been better to move the child to the other side or having him face towards the light. Here we are overexposed also, no detail in the clothing or his skin. Your subject is the little one, not all the distracting elements in the background and this is why I've stated there's to much space around your subject.

[Dobick]

personally not crazy about the skin tone in the first two. First one looks a bit mottled and grey. Using a different conversion/color filter set can really turn the skin tone from dark to light, etc. On the second one, I have never been a fan of green colored people. completely a personal preference, but in my opinion, I don't think green skin is particularly flattering.

[reader0428]

Hi Kara,

I didn't even notice that #1 was an over-the-shoulder shot until Ernst pointed it out. When framing these kinds of shots, I usually try to include more of the parent so you can really see the relationship. Here's what I mean:





You also had questions about the lighting on #2, which I think the images above may help with too. I asked the mom to stand just inside the opening of a French door in her kitchen. So there was no light coming from over their heads, the only light was coming from the open sky outside the French door. If you look closely at your photo, you'll probably see the shadows under the eyes and also under the eyebrows (particularly close to the inner corners of the eyes). In the photos above, since the light was directional and was only coming from in front of the baby, there were no shadows under the eyes and since she was looking at the sky, there are nice bright catchlights in the eyes. Also, since the light on the baby's face was several stops brighter than the light inside the house, the background went pretty dark (which I like, in this case).

When you are shooting outside, try to find places that create directional light - meaning the light comes in from only one direction (or two directions), not from all around. Porches, overhangs, etc. are great for this. That will help prevent the "raccoon eye" effect. To see the effects of this, ask your husband (or anyone else who can follow directions, haha) to stand outside in bright sunlight. Look carefully at how the light falls on his face and how the forehead and facial bones at the eyebrows most likely create shadows around and under the eye area. Now take a large piece of stiff cardboard and ask him to hold it over his head (or move him to a porch or other shaded area with his face to the sky) and watch how the lighting pattern changes. The shadows should go away. To create GOOD shadows on a porch, instead of shooting straight toward the subject while they are facing directly toward the sky (as I did above), you can position yourself so that the open sky is to your left or right (not to your back) and ask your subject to turn their face to look at you. You want to look for light in both eyes and a patch of light on the cheek that faces away from the sky, like this (in this case, the subject's right cheek):



In this photo, we were standing under a porch, the open sky was to camera right and the wall of the house was camera left, blocking the light and creating the shadows on the right side of her face (camera left).

Didn't mean to hijak your thread with posting a bunch of other images (and I'm sure these are not technically perfect examples), but I thought it might help to give a visual aid to what I'm trying to explain. :) A book on this subject that I've found really helpful is Available LIght: Photographic Techniques for Using Existing Light Sources by Don Marr.

Hope this is helpful...