New Flash - My sons 8mos old mini shoot C&C please and thank you

[cgipson1]

"Negative space" advances a composition. "Dead space" on the other hand, weakens the shot. These are filled with dead space.

NOBODY will give a rat's patootie about seeing the empty wall when he's a grown man...

These are portraits of a BABY...show his body..show HIM...not an empty wall. That's how to make the compositions better. Study the art of composition.

See, there's actually a HUGE difference between negative space, and dead space. You will not learn anything about composition by taking advice from people who have never studied composition, and who have no idea what dead space is.

You're thinking very technically and not artistically. We have completely different ideas about negative vs. dead space.

I'm certain I've got composition down, but thanks for the tips. You're ignorant to even assume you know about me or my compositional knowledge.

haven't seen you post any "killer" shots yet, to prove your compositional knowledge.... I don't think you have posted any images (I know you haven't... I checked!)! For all we know you are just a Blogger or an Art Student, who can talk a good deal.. but not produce anything worthwhile! Hmmm... maybe you are a Professional Critic?

 

[salalone]

The main bulk of work here is either extremely traditional, or that hyper-real HDR look... both of which are tired and overtly-masculine. Not my style at all. Not the lead-consumer females' either. It all SCREAMS car magazine at its very best and most of the work here is completely sub-par or meaningless. The shot of the dirty sink and tipped over soap? At least the photographer fully admitted that it was a click of the shutter and not a composition, bless his heart.

I'm solidly booked and quite happy. Especially since I started as a lowly MWAC and worked my knowledge, gear and business up to the level of a professional. I know what I'm doing, quite simply put... I don't just talk the talk. In fact, I don't even know how that would be possible, to understand intimately exposure and composition, never having built a portfolio.

You all keep telling people to get back in the box, if you like, but it's pig-headed to say the least. What else could I expect though, from this crowd.

The saddest thing is that I fear new people do a google search and land HERE first... travesty. There's no way to learn or grow on this forum. The only thing I credit this forum with is one man who had the courage to post a directing link to somewhere else to find like-minded individuals with talent.

 

[tirediron]

I disagree with this wholeheartedly. I love a horizontal portrait with negative space on one side... it's a great look. Matter of taste, I guess. Compositionally it works for me. I also like the focus on his face rather than his whole body, and she didn't chop his joints so it's appropriate.

I think you'll find yourself amongst rather sparse company with that thought!

I'm not surprised... but then, I haven't found too many of the photographs here to be of my taste.

Perhaps you could share with us your body of work so that we may learn from your [self-professed] knowledge...

 

[tirediron]

The main bulk of work here is either extremely traditional, or that hyper-real HDR look... both of which are tired and overtly-masculine. Not my style at all. Not the lead-consumer females' either. It all SCREAMS car magazine at its very best and most of the work here is completely sub-par or meaningless. The shot of the dirty sink and tipped over soap? At least the photographer fully admitted that it was a click of the shutter and not a composition, bless his heart.
I'm solidly booked and quite happy. Especially since I started as a lowly MWAC and worked my knowledge, gear and business up to the level of a professional. I know what I'm doing, quite simply put... I don't just talk the talk. In fact, I don't even know how that would be possible, to understand intimately exposure and composition, never having built a portfolio.
You all keep telling people to get back in the box, if you like, but it's pig-headed to say the least. What else could I expect though, from this crowd.
The saddest thing is that I fear new people do a google search and land HERE first... travesty. There's no way to learn or grow on this forum. The only thing I credit this forum with is one man who had the courage to post a directing link to somewhere else to find like-minded individuals with talent.

Again, perhaps you would care to back up these claims of skill, knowledge and ability with some verifiable work of your own which demonstrates how much better you are than the rest of us? In the lack of any evidence to the contrary, I must say that you are starting to sound to me like someone who has read a few books on art & photography and is not regurgitating bits and pieces of them in an effort to incite conflict. NONE of the truly great photographers that I have met or read about have ever referred to someone else's work as meaningless. Even the most beginning photographer should understand (and almost all seem to) that art is completely subjective; meaning, as is beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

It's one thing to say that you do not understand another's work, or that it doesn't move you in any way, and it's certainly acceptable to provide critique based on your knowledge and experience, particularily when it's associated with accepted theory and practice, but to decry the work of [literally] thousands of photographers as "meaningless"... I'm afraid I can't really understand an ego that large, but if you can support it, well, I will be the first in line to apologize. Deal?

 

[cgipson1]

The main bulk of work here is either extremely traditional, or that hyper-real HDR look... both of which are tired and overtly-masculine. Not my style at all. Not the lead-consumer females' either. It all SCREAMS car magazine at its very best and most of the work here is completely sub-par or meaningless. The shot of the dirty sink and tipped over soap? At least the photographer fully admitted that it was a click of the shutter and not a composition, bless his heart.
I'm solidly booked and quite happy. Especially since I started as a lowly MWAC and worked my knowledge, gear and business up to the level of a professional. I know what I'm doing, quite simply put... I don't just talk the talk. In fact, I don't even know how that would be possible, to understand intimately exposure and composition, never having built a portfolio.
You all keep telling people to get back in the box, if you like, but it's pig-headed to say the least. What else could I expect though, from this crowd.
The saddest thing is that I fear new people do a google search and land HERE first... travesty. There's no way to learn or grow on this forum. The only thing I credit this forum with is one man who had the courage to post a directing link to somewhere else to find like-minded individuals with talent.

Again, perhaps you would care to back up these claims of skill, knowledge and ability with some verifiable work of your own which demonstrates how much better you are than the rest of us? In the lack of any evidence to the contrary, I must say that you are starting to sound to me like someone who has read a few books on art & photography and is not regurgitating bits and pieces of them in an effort to incite conflict. NONE of the truly great photographers that I have met or read about have ever referred to someone else's work as meaningless. Even the most beginning photographer should understand (and almost all seem to) that art is completely subjective; meaning, as is beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

It's one thing to say that you do not understand another's work, or that it doesn't move you in any way, and it's certainly acceptable to provide critique based on your knowledge and experience, particularily when it's associated with accepted theory and practice, but to decry the work of [literally] thousands of photographers as "meaningless"... I'm afraid I can't really understand an ego that large, but if you can support it, well, I will be the first in line to apologize. Deal?

Betcha a fiver that she won't post anything worthwhile!! (MWAC...lol!)

Salalone.. let me post a link for you... to people I think you might find like-minded! >>> http://WWW.FACEBOOK.COM

 

[Rwsphotos]

Ok now that the ops photos are showing I have to agree every one else
The DEAD space in no way inhances these. The op asked what they could do in the future that would work better. We are not being asses. For the lone dissenter on this thread if you dont like what any of us post why hang around bashing the forum it does not help the op.

 

[pixmedic]

thus far, the OP has seemed to take the C&C well, and hopefully will improve because of it. kudos.
except for the professional coddler, the suggestions given here are sound. I don't have anything else to add except the best way to improve your photography is to read your cameras manual, practice, and read your cameras manual.

 

[salalone]

The main bulk of work here is either extremely traditional, or that hyper-real HDR look... both of which are tired and overtly-masculine. Not my style at all. Not the lead-consumer females' either. It all SCREAMS car magazine at its very best and most of the work here is completely sub-par or meaningless. The shot of the dirty sink and tipped over soap? At least the photographer fully admitted that it was a click of the shutter and not a composition, bless his heart.
I'm solidly booked and quite happy. Especially since I started as a lowly MWAC and worked my knowledge, gear and business up to the level of a professional. I know what I'm doing, quite simply put... I don't just talk the talk. In fact, I don't even know how that would be possible, to understand intimately exposure and composition, never having built a portfolio.
You all keep telling people to get back in the box, if you like, but it's pig-headed to say the least. What else could I expect though, from this crowd.
The saddest thing is that I fear new people do a google search and land HERE first... travesty. There's no way to learn or grow on this forum. The only thing I credit this forum with is one man who had the courage to post a directing link to somewhere else to find like-minded individuals with talent.

Again, perhaps you would care to back up these claims of skill, knowledge and ability with some verifiable work of your own which demonstrates how much better you are than the rest of us? In the lack of any evidence to the contrary, I must say that you are starting to sound to me like someone who has read a few books on art & photography and is not regurgitating bits and pieces of them in an effort to incite conflict. NONE of the truly great photographers that I have met or read about have ever referred to someone else's work as meaningless. Even the most beginning photographer should understand (and almost all seem to) that art is completely subjective; meaning, as is beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

It's one thing to say that you do not understand another's work, or that it doesn't move you in any way, and it's certainly acceptable to provide critique based on your knowledge and experience, particularily when it's associated with accepted theory and practice, but to decry the work of [literally] thousands of photographers as "meaningless"... I'm afraid I can't really understand an ego that large, but if you can support it, well, I will be the first in line to apologize. Deal?

Betcha a fiver that she won't post anything worthwhile!! (MWAC...lol!)

Salalone.. let me post a link for you... to people I think you might find like-minded! >>> http://WWW.FACEBOOK.COM

HILARIOUS.

What would you like to see from my portfolio? Fine art, travel, portraiture, lifestyle, editorial...?

 

[cgipson1]

John... you won the bet! (your bet.. not mine!) lol!

 

[salalone]

The main bulk of work here is either extremely traditional, or that hyper-real HDR look... both of which are tired and overtly-masculine. Not my style at all. Not the lead-consumer females' either. It all SCREAMS car magazine at its very best and most of the work here is completely sub-par or meaningless. The shot of the dirty sink and tipped over soap? At least the photographer fully admitted that it was a click of the shutter and not a composition, bless his heart.
I'm solidly booked and quite happy. Especially since I started as a lowly MWAC and worked my knowledge, gear and business up to the level of a professional. I know what I'm doing, quite simply put... I don't just talk the talk. In fact, I don't even know how that would be possible, to understand intimately exposure and composition, never having built a portfolio.
You all keep telling people to get back in the box, if you like, but it's pig-headed to say the least. What else could I expect though, from this crowd.
The saddest thing is that I fear new people do a google search and land HERE first... travesty. There's no way to learn or grow on this forum. The only thing I credit this forum with is one man who had the courage to post a directing link to somewhere else to find like-minded individuals with talent.

Again, perhaps you would care to back up these claims of skill, knowledge and ability with some verifiable work of your own which demonstrates how much better you are than the rest of us? In the lack of any evidence to the contrary, I must say that you are starting to sound to me like someone who has read a few books on art & photography and is not regurgitating bits and pieces of them in an effort to incite conflict. NONE of the truly great photographers that I have met or read about have ever referred to someone else's work as meaningless. Even the most beginning photographer should understand (and almost all seem to) that art is completely subjective; meaning, as is beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

It's one thing to say that you do not understand another's work, or that it doesn't move you in any way, and it's certainly acceptable to provide critique based on your knowledge and experience, particularily when it's associated with accepted theory and practice, but to decry the work of [literally] thousands of photographers as "meaningless"... I'm afraid I can't really understand an ego that large, but if you can support it, well, I will be the first in line to apologize. Deal?

Meaningless to ME, I should clarify. The thread of (poorly lit and limb-chopped) models holding up tank their tops isn't what I'd say MEANS anything, even if I did want to have sex with them. Perhaps saying sub-par OR meaningless when referring to the majority of work posted here was mean, and that I can say I'm sorry for.

As for my abilities and my portfolio... My issue with posting to my site is that I'm running a business and I'm not interested in trolls coming to harass me where my clients might see. I don't need garbage on my website or other social media sites, which I am concerned about given the drama on this forum.

Here is some recent work from Tuscany:

The idea that a portrait must always be taken in a portrait orientation is baffling to me. I have leaps and bounds to go in photography (as anyone does), but I assure you, I have a full client base and I DO know how to control a camera.


Did I say something mean? I guess I did... and I apologize.

 

[pixmedic]

The main bulk of work here is either extremely traditional, or that hyper-real HDR look... both of which are tired and overtly-masculine. Not my style at all. Not the lead-consumer females' either. It all SCREAMS car magazine at its very best and most of the work here is completely sub-par or meaningless. The shot of the dirty sink and tipped over soap? At least the photographer fully admitted that it was a click of the shutter and not a composition, bless his heart.
I'm solidly booked and quite happy. Especially since I started as a lowly MWAC and worked my knowledge, gear and business up to the level of a professional. I know what I'm doing, quite simply put... I don't just talk the talk. In fact, I don't even know how that would be possible, to understand intimately exposure and composition, never having built a portfolio.
You all keep telling people to get back in the box, if you like, but it's pig-headed to say the least. What else could I expect though, from this crowd.
The saddest thing is that I fear new people do a google search and land HERE first... travesty. There's no way to learn or grow on this forum. The only thing I credit this forum with is one man who had the courage to post a directing link to somewhere else to find like-minded individuals with talent.

Again, perhaps you would care to back up these claims of skill, knowledge and ability with some verifiable work of your own which demonstrates how much better you are than the rest of us? In the lack of any evidence to the contrary, I must say that you are starting to sound to me like someone who has read a few books on art & photography and is not regurgitating bits and pieces of them in an effort to incite conflict. NONE of the truly great photographers that I have met or read about have ever referred to someone else's work as meaningless. Even the most beginning photographer should understand (and almost all seem to) that art is completely subjective; meaning, as is beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

It's one thing to say that you do not understand another's work, or that it doesn't move you in any way, and it's certainly acceptable to provide critique based on your knowledge and experience, particularily when it's associated with accepted theory and practice, but to decry the work of [literally] thousands of photographers as "meaningless"... I'm afraid I can't really understand an ego that large, but if you can support it, well, I will be the first in line to apologize. Deal?

Meaningless to ME, I should clarify. The thread of (poorly lit and limb-chopped) models holding up tank their tops isn't what I'd say MEANS anything, even if I did want to have sex with them. Perhaps saying sub-par OR meaningless when referring to the majority of work posted here was mean, and that I can say I'm sorry for.

As for my abilities and my portfolio... My issue with posting to my site is that I'm running a business and I'm not interested in trolls coming to harass me where my clients might see. I don't need garbage on my website or other social media sites, which I am concerned about given the drama on this forum.

Here is some recent work from Tuscany:

The idea that a portrait must always be taken in a portrait orientation is baffling to me. I have leaps and bounds to go in photography (as anyone does), but I assure you, I have a full client base and I DO know how to control a camera. Did I say something mean? I guess I did... and I apologize.

well, you posted a bunch of small stuff that is unable to be viewed full size...but for "knowing how to control a camera" you appear to have issues with underexposure and white balance on many of these pictures. some of the building pictures have serious DOF issues as well as stuff that is basically just random snapshots and not appearing to have ANY composition or thought invested in them at all.
but hey...if you have "clients" paying for them, more power to you. lots of people on FB have clients.

also...you built yourself up to be a professional grade portrait photographer, yet I see zero people in your post.

 

[salalone]

Again, perhaps you would care to back up these claims of skill, knowledge and ability with some verifiable work of your own which demonstrates how much better you are than the rest of us? In the lack of any evidence to the contrary, I must say that you are starting to sound to me like someone who has read a few books on art & photography and is not regurgitating bits and pieces of them in an effort to incite conflict. NONE of the truly great photographers that I have met or read about have ever referred to someone else's work as meaningless. Even the most beginning photographer should understand (and almost all seem to) that art is completely subjective; meaning, as is beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

It's one thing to say that you do not understand another's work, or that it doesn't move you in any way, and it's certainly acceptable to provide critique based on your knowledge and experience, particularily when it's associated with accepted theory and practice, but to decry the work of [literally] thousands of photographers as "meaningless"... I'm afraid I can't really understand an ego that large, but if you can support it, well, I will be the first in line to apologize. Deal?

Meaningless to ME, I should clarify. The thread of (poorly lit and limb-chopped) models holding up tank their tops isn't what I'd say MEANS anything, even if I did want to have sex with them. Perhaps saying sub-par OR meaningless when referring to the majority of work posted here was mean, and that I can say I'm sorry for.

As for my abilities and my portfolio... My issue with posting to my site is that I'm running a business and I'm not interested in trolls coming to harass me where my clients might see. I don't need garbage on my website or other social media sites, which I am concerned about given the drama on this forum.

Here is some recent work from Tuscany:

The idea that a portrait must always be taken in a portrait orientation is baffling to me. I have leaps and bounds to go in photography (as anyone does), but I assure you, I have a full client base and I DO know how to control a camera. Did I say something mean? I guess I did... and I apologize.

well, you posted a bunch of small stuff that is unable to be viewed full size...but for "knowing how to control a camera" you appear to have issues with underexposure and white balance on many of these pictures. some of the building pictures have serious DOF issues as well as stuff that is basically just random snapshots and not appearing to have ANY composition or thought invested in them at all.
but hey...if you have "clients" paying for them, more power to you. lots of people on FB have clients.

false. exposure is spot on, white balance is consistent and correct, and i'm not even certain how you assessed depth of field on a building.

and where's your work, friend?

the whole thing is hilarious.

 

[Designer]

The idea that a portrait must always be taken in a portrait orientation is baffling to me.

Nobody has written that.

 

[pixmedic]

Meaningless to ME, I should clarify. The thread of (poorly lit and limb-chopped) models holding up tank their tops isn't what I'd say MEANS anything, even if I did want to have sex with them. Perhaps saying sub-par OR meaningless when referring to the majority of work posted here was mean, and that I can say I'm sorry for.

As for my abilities and my portfolio... My issue with posting to my site is that I'm running a business and I'm not interested in trolls coming to harass me where my clients might see. I don't need garbage on my website or other social media sites, which I am concerned about given the drama on this forum.

Here is some recent work from Tuscany:

The idea that a portrait must always be taken in a portrait orientation is baffling to me. I have leaps and bounds to go in photography (as anyone does), but I assure you, I have a full client base and I DO know how to control a camera. Did I say something mean? I guess I did... and I apologize.

well, you posted a bunch of small stuff that is unable to be viewed full size...but for "knowing how to control a camera" you appear to have issues with underexposure and white balance on many of these pictures. some of the building pictures have serious DOF issues as well as stuff that is basically just random snapshots and not appearing to have ANY composition or thought invested in them at all.
but hey...if you have "clients" paying for them, more power to you. lots of people on FB have clients.

false.

and where's your work, friend?

the whole thing is hilarious.

you can search my posts and see plenty of what i have posted. and "I" never claimed to be a Pro.
and your right. the whole thing IS hilarious. you claimed professional grade work, and delivered decent snapshots.
congratulations. if you cant even see your own issues, you have more serious problems than the quality of your photos.

 

[salalone]

i apologize for decrying the work here to be meaningless, that was an ill-chosen word.

but as for the rest of it, it's idiotic...