Two for C&C...

[mrpink]

Never much for flower pics, but I was shooting this one to show my friend my new camera. Thought it came out very well.

D40, 18-55 kit, ISO 200, 1/30, F5.6

First time playing in the snow with the babe... I was wondering what could be done to this photo to improve it PP wise? I did some brightening in Lightroom, but not much.

D40, 18-55 kit, ISO 200, 1/500, F11

Thanks TPF...

p!nK

 

[erichards]

I like the first one. As for the second one I would recommend using curves in Photoshop(if available) to bump up the exposure a bit. Cute Kid!

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

What do you like about the first one?

 

[erichards]

What I like about the first one is how the lines on the left lead your eye right to the bright flower that is well illuminated from behind on the right. The denser part of the flower (the bits with more petal etc...) are darker and gradually lead out lighter brighter edges that separate it from an otherwise dull background. Granted the bright window is a bit distracting on the left but over all I enjoy the image.

 

[kangta13]

too much stem in the first one.. takes away from the flower.. would have liked the light coming from a different angle also... haha i'm trying my best to critique since that guys post yesterday.. but i only have two years under my belt.. .. and agree that 2nd one is underexposed would like the kid positioned a little higher, or more space shown on the bottom.. thanks for the pics!

 

[Dominantly]

The first one... well, I can't tell for sure, but I'm leaning towards the flower is not in focus. At the very least, it isn't as sharp as it should be.
You also have that window with all that white light giving you some nice back light, but seriously acting as a distraction.
TO make it work I would have turned the flower to face it from the front, then placed a dark backdrop behind it (anything you have large enough to fill your frame). I would have then used the window light to light it from one side, and a reflector on the opposite side to light it. You can use car sun shades, tin foil, small mirror, etc.

I would have ensured the flower was a decent ways away from the backdrop and shot on a tripod focused on the flower with a timer releasing the shutter. The window light will outline your stem and petals giving you separation from the backdrop, and the flowers bright color will give it some pop and interest.

 

[kangta13]

The first one... well, I can't tell for sure, but I'm leaning towards the flower is not in focus. At the very least, it isn't as sharp as it should be.

yeah looks like the stem where it connects is in focus...

 

[mrpink]

The first one... well, I can't tell for sure, but I'm leaning towards the flower is not in focus. At the very least, it isn't as sharp as it should be.
You also have that window with all that white light giving you some nice back light, but seriously acting as a distraction.
TO make it work I would have turned the flower to face it from the front, then placed a dark backdrop behind it (anything you have large enough to fill your frame). I would have then used the window light to light it from one side, and a reflector on the opposite side to light it. You can use car sun shades, tin foil, small mirror, etc.

I would have ensured the flower was a decent ways away from the backdrop and shot on a tripod focused on the flower with a timer releasing the shutter. The window light will outline your stem and petals giving you separation from the backdrop, and the flowers bright color will give it some pop and interest.

Hmmm, that sounds a lot like work to me... lol. That shot was more just showing a friend the difference between a DSLR and his $100 PnS. I quick scan around his kitchen yielded that as a subject. As I get deeper into photography, I am sure your methodology will make much more sense to me. Would a larger F/ number have solved the focal issue?

I went back through the days shots and think I might have jumped the gun on the best "baby shot" tell me what you all think:

D40, 18-55 kit, ISO 200, 1/320, F9 - shot at 32mm.

thanks for all the responses!!

p!nK

 

[Dominantly]

The first one... well, I can't tell for sure, but I'm leaning towards the flower is not in focus. At the very least, it isn't as sharp as it should be.
You also have that window with all that white light giving you some nice back light, but seriously acting as a distraction.
TO make it work I would have turned the flower to face it from the front, then placed a dark backdrop behind it (anything you have large enough to fill your frame). I would have then used the window light to light it from one side, and a reflector on the opposite side to light it. You can use car sun shades, tin foil, small mirror, etc.

I would have ensured the flower was a decent ways away from the backdrop and shot on a tripod focused on the flower with a timer releasing the shutter. The window light will outline your stem and petals giving you separation from the backdrop, and the flowers bright color will give it some pop and interest.

Hmmm, that sounds a lot like work to me... lol. That shot was more just showing a friend the difference between a DSLR and his $100 PnS. I quick scan around his kitchen yielded that as a subject. As I get deeper into photography, I am sure your methodology will make much more sense to me. Would a larger F/ number have solved the focal issue?

I went back through the days shots and think I might have jumped the gun on the best "baby shot" tell me what you all think:

D40, 18-55 kit, ISO 200, 1/320, F9 - shot at 32mm.

thanks for all the responses!!

p!nK

Well, not to be an ass, but if that was your demonstration shot, I would see no point in a DSLR if I was your friend. A P&S could take a photo far surpassing that one. You also posted it on here for C&C, so remember that as well.
If you were to go with a smaller Aperture (large f/stop) you would get more of the flower in focus, but you'll also show more of that boring background.


The above baby photo is far far far better then the first one you posted.:thumbup:

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Hmmm, that sounds a lot like work to me... lol. That shot was more just showing a friend the difference between a DSLR and his $100 PnS.

This is why I rarely give C&C. :er:

 

[erichards]

Love the expression on the second baby pictures as I often feel that way when dragged out into the cold MN winters...:sillysmi:

 

[tailz03]

The snow looks like dirty snow to me, its too underexposed and is bugging me but i love the flower

 

[mrpink]

Well, not to be an ass, but if that was your demonstration shot, I would see no point in a DSLR if I was your friend. A P&S could take a photo far surpassing that one. You also posted it on here for C&C, so remember that as well.
If you were to go with a smaller Aperture (large f/stop) you would get more of the flower in focus, but you'll also show more of that boring background.


The above baby photo is far far far better then the first one you posted.:thumbup:

Well the actual discussion was on megapixels. He was under the impression that more always meant better pictures. So I took a pic using my D40 with 6.1 mp and he took one with his 10.1 sony PnS. I wasn't trying to convince him of the need for a DSLR by any means.

I do appreciate your feedback, positive or negative. And I do plan on trying your method when I have some extra time. Again, thanks.:thumbup:

Is there anything I can do to correct the first baby picture? I love the expression she is giving in that one and would hate to chuck it if there is something that can be done to improve it (if just to 4"x6" quality)

Thanks

p!nK