Park Photo Shoot

kric2schaam626 · Jul 25, 2009

Specs on 3 & 7??

-Newb.

Reese's PB Luver · Jul 25, 2009

I love the way the trees in #3 (especially the right photo; left is a bit too distant and not as good a look on the boy's face for me) seem to blur into an etheral circle around the boy's head! Did you see that when you took the photo or was it a happy surprise after the capture?

#2 - I love the expression on his face!

#5 is precious! What a beautiful little girl - she reminds me of one of the child actresses.

Love the flower.

#6 both look like too much like snapshots. Getting down on her level may have made them less P&S-ey. And getting rid of the washed-out color for the light pink bike, too.

Overall, though, the package is good and I'm sure the parents were very happy with the results!

camz · Jul 25, 2009

doogan said:
Your photographs are...simply gorgeous.
If I could find any fault I suppose it would
be the handle bars, as rebecca said, pulling
the eyes away from the girl

Thanks doogan!

Derrel said:
I do like the vibrant and colorful color palette you have, but the first and fourth photos are horizontal compositions for no apparent reason. In the top photo, the extremely out of focus tree does not advance the composition much to my eye, and the fourth shot, the one of the same little blond boy appears to have some serious, heavy background cloning that stands out. Same with the little girl on the tricycle-the cloning is obvious even at web size.

Photo #4 really is not a good horizontal composition; his head is too close to the top of the frame,and the entire left hand side of the frame shows us nothing but your copyright stamp. I think cropping off the feet of both children on the brother/sister portrait,as well as the girl's foot in the first tricycle shot is something you ought to try not to allow to happen.

Frames five and six are good examples of pictures that make absolute sense as vertical shots; frame 4 would have made a good vertical as well, but it makes a poor horizontal pose. I like frames 2, 6, and 7 quite a bit,and think those are the most refined poses you showed. I think had frame 1 been framed as a vertical, it would have paired very well with frame 6. I would rather see more of the child's body than the tree in frame 1; 6 corrects that by emphasizing the child,and minimizing the out of focus tree bark that dominates most of frame #1's entire left hand side.

I hope this C&C doesn't come off as too harsh, but that's the way I was taught to pose and frame; horizontal portraits minimize the size of the sitter's features, and almost invariably a horizontal shot becomes an "environmental" portrait since it shows so many degrees of view. In frames 2 and 7 and 10, there's an actual "need" to orient the camera horizontally, and those poses all make sense and are sound poses. Frames 1 and 4 are shown as horizontals, but the situations and the amount of the subject shown are poorly-suited to horizontal framing. I think if you can fully comprehend what I am trying to say here, you could elevate your posing and framing up several notches just by trying to look at some of the 'secrets' of people photography and eliminating what are called "incomplete poses" and "amputations".

Wow very detailed CC-thanks for taking the time! I appreciate it alot! I see what your saying about framing the shots no doubt about that. You sound like a studio photographer though(I maybe wrong). We do on location shoots and just hang out with our clients while we shoot. It's hard to frame it perfectly like you mentioned since the shoot is very organic and casual(being that the clients moved around alot and all). Offcourse there's some direction from us but in order to set it up like you mentioned above...sounds like studio work to me. But for cropping the pictures I'm considering all that you mentioned. All though I still love the space in picture 1 and 4 though. Thanks alot for the input, wasn't a harsh at all in my opinion

DeadEye said:
:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

Thanks DeadEye!

PastTheFuture said:
These are very well done. My favorites are #2, 5, and 10. There's only one thing that I don't like much about #10 and that's how the boy's eyes are nearly closed. On #9, his hands look kind of stiff and unnatural. I'm kind of iffy on #1, I'm not sure what it is, but I like it and I don't like it. Yeah, that doesn't make any sense to me either Anyways, these are overall wonderful shots of wonderful models, in my opinion. :thumbup:

Yeah #10 has a different version of them both looking in the camera...I just liked how this looked casual. Thanks for the input!

Baaaark said:
You're very very creative.

Thanks!

camz · Jul 26, 2009

kric2schaam626 said:
Specs on 3 & 7??

-Newb.

#3 Shot on a Full Frame

Lens: 85L Prime
Aperature: 1.8
Shutter: 1/640
ISO: 200

#7 Shot on a Full Frame

Lens: 85L Prime
Aperature: 2.0
Shutter: 1/400
ISO: 125

No reflectors on both of these.

Reese's PB Luver said:
I love the way the trees in #3 (especially the right photo; left is a bit too distant and not as good a look on the boy's face for me) seem to blur into an etheral circle around the boy's head! Did you see that when you took the photo or was it a happy surprise after the capture?

#2 - I love the expression on his face!

#5 is precious! What a beautiful little girl - she reminds me of one of the child actresses. Love the flower.

#6 both look like too much like snapshots. Getting down on her level may have made them less P&S-ey. And getting rid of the washed-out color for the light pink bike, too.

Overall, though, the package is good and I'm sure the parents were very happy with the results!.

We saw the way the trees lined up into a tunnel over his head and glad to say it was part of the plan that turned out really well

.

#6 is a bit blown out I agree with you. Thanks alot for commenting! We've shown a darker exposure for the clients but I don't know why they chose this one instead.

platano · Jul 27, 2009

those are great, they look like fun kids to work with

SrBiscuit · Jul 27, 2009

#2 is fantastic.
great comp, great expression, great colors. :thumbup:

camz · Jul 27, 2009

platano said:
those are great, they look like fun kids to work with

They were awesome. They had all this energy that they brought to the shoot. Thanks!

SrBiscuit said:
#2 is fantastic.
great comp, great expression, great colors. :thumbup:

Thanks for the comments!

rub · Jul 28, 2009

great stuff, very inspiring!

camz · Jul 29, 2009

rub said:
great stuff, very inspiring!

appreciate that rub!

Blossom101 · Jul 29, 2009

These are awesome! These are exactly the kind of pictures I would like to learn how to take. If you don't mind I have a few questions for you.

How do you get the background to look so blurry and bright....I love that. (Like the trees in the background of the picture where the little boy is on his scooter.) What photo editing software do you use?

What kind of camera do you have?

Thanks so much for any help or advise. I'm trying to educate myself before I actually invest in a camera and software.

Sweetsomedays · Jul 29, 2009

These are fantastic and I really love that second one!!

Breanna · Jul 29, 2009

Re: #10....

My honest answer? It's something I could have done. The rest of your photos? Not so much. You're better than I am

Haha.

camz · Jul 29, 2009

Blossom101 said:
These are awesome! These are exactly the kind of pictures I would like to learn how to take. If you don't mind I have a few questions for you.

How do you get the background to look so blurry and bright....I love that. (Like the trees in the background of the picture where the little boy is on his scooter.) What photo editing software do you use?

What kind of camera do you have?

Thanks so much for any help or advise. I'm trying to educate myself before I actually invest in a camera and software.

Thanks for commenting. You get that background blur called bokeh by decreasing the Depth of Field. Basically what you saw in the picture with the boy in his scooter is that he was in focus and the trees in the background were not. You get more of that bokeh when you take a picture with a lower aperature(opening of your lens) - the lower aperature number means the bigger the opening.

To answer your question about the camera I use.

Camera: Canon 5D, 40D, 20D
Lenses: 85mm prime in regards to the picture of the boy in the scooter
Software: Adobe CS4

My advice to you about investing in equipment is to try to get the best lense you can whatever brand you choose. The Body in my opinion is secondary, the lenses can last you a lifetime and the lenses are the eyes of your equipment. I say start off with a standard zoom lens and your style will evolve and you'll see where you go from there. Good luck!