Maternity Shoots C&C

[openskyphoto]

Please give me feed back :)

[jenmazy]

The lighting is very harsh in the first and third. There are harsh shadows and I can barely see her eyes in the first. The second is good but the processing makes her look older. The third also almost looks drawn. Is it oversharpened? Did you use an action?

[texxter]

Boy, these are pretty rough. Are these the best from the session?

Lighting, composition, postprocessing and expression all could be better. I'd like to see other images if you have them.

[openskyphoto]

Thank you for comments... I am just getting started in my business and like the feed back... All three of them sold and 8x10...

[texxter]

Originally Posted by openskyphoto

Thank you for comments... I am just getting started in my business and like the feed back... All three of them sold and 8x10...

I believe you, congrats! It's not about how good the photographs are, but how good a selling job you do, right?

BTW, how did you crop the second image to print 8x10? It seems that either the forehead or the hands get chopped off. Just curious.

[openskyphoto]

this is not the original. it was a close call when i cropped it but it worked.

[toverman]

Glad you had success with these. Basically these are my opinions, worth 2 cents or less:

To improve, avoid harsh sun: it blows out pale skin and white shirts and can give subjects "raccoon eyes," i.e. the way the woman's eyes are shaded in the first. Also can put strange shadows on faces like it did here.

Second photo has even shade, but it is way underexposed. The woman's eyes are not in focus, and that is typically where a viewers' eyes go first. They should almost always be sharp. The underexposure and flat lighting don't let the subject pop; she looks like part of the background. This is where supplemental lights are important (even just a flash or two). The angle does not accentuate her belly, often a goal of maternity shots. Hair is in her face. Background doesn't add to the photo.

Last one, the gigantic flower is hiding her belly and her hands. The zipper on her pants is awkward and shouldn't be visible. It has overexposed and underexposed elements and the skintones look off. The composition is almost too tight to realize what is going on in the photo.

[Cajungaltx]

The first one - the whites are totally blown out... and you can't see one eye.
The second - she's not in focus - looks like focus fell on the bench behind her.
The third - harsh light - can't see/tell that it's her hands holding the flower - at first I thought it was some kind of belly band... and it's just off color wise.

In my opinion - I wouldn't have sold these to her at all. I might have given them to her - but more than likely, I would have reshot the session to get better images.

I can sell you a nice bucket of fertilizer that's organic, and all natural... but when you take off the lid, it's still just a pile of crap...

Being good at sales is a KEY skill - so that is AWESOME - but being good at photography will do you MORE good in the long run. If she is showing those off as 'your' images... in a few months when you look back at those - your going to want to yank them down off of her shelf YOURSELF.... lol...

Try to keep your client out of direct sun - it's a image killer in most cases. I know some of my first images that I took outside, I'd have 'rays' of light hitting them... blowing out 'parts' of their face, or their head or something else... I didn't know any better... lol...

Welcome to the addiction!