A few photos for critique...

[Jarrard]

 

[Jarrard]

Please give it to me! I would love some criticism.

 

[Pejacre]

Lovely shots. Number 6 looks out of focus to me. The expression you caught in the last one is just fantastic.

 

[Jarrard]

I shot number six today. I had a hard time with him because he was moving around, and that is something I am still practicing. (Shooting kids in motion.) Easy on auto! Learning to do in manual! Haha

 

[Jarrard]

I do not charge people yet. I still have a lot to learn.

 

[wyogirl]

Its too many photos in one post to give C&C. You will get better feedback putting one picture in its own post. Having said that, they aren't bad. I hope the second picture is a composite as that pose is quite dangerous to the infant if there isn't an assistant or parent supporting the head and neck at all times.

 

[Jarrard]

It was a composite! I was really excited about that one! My husband is in surgery fellowship, and that was a co-worker's baby! We are all about safe-photography!!!

 

[Peeb]

It was a composite! I was really excited about that one! My husband is in surgery fellowship, and that was a co-worker's baby! We are all about safe-photography!!!

Impressive!

 

[Peeb]

I like the way the head pops out of the frame of the doorway on number one

 

[FITBMX]

I really don't know enough to give you C&C that is worth much, but a few of these are kinda soft. Others will be able to help you more. These do look like a great start!
You also may want to put a number above each photo to make them easier to C&C.

 

[Derrel]

SHot #6 has very strong backlight, but the child's face is in rather dim, low, indoor light. It;s not a good lighting pattern for a bright, happy expression--it needs some brightening of the child's face. And as has been mentioned, the focus is off a wee bit on it.

Overall, I think most of these are just a little bit dark, and need a bit more exposure and or brightness added in post processing; the overall look is soft, and low-contrast, which is a look I like, but think they need juuuust a touch more oomph added...maybe tick up the exposure like .7 EV or so on a couple.

The strongest one in processing and subject agreement is the one of the little girl looking down, the sepia tone shot, #4. It's a high-angle, looking-down-at-child shot, which shows her pretty hair and lovely eyelashes, and how cute she is. What parent wouldn't love to see that shot, with five other shots from that play session combined with it?

You have a good mix of camera heights and angles; on photo forums there's way too much over-emphasis on getting down to the child's level; sometimes, much of the time, that's a good idea, but it's far from being a rule one must follow; shot #4 is a good example of how the high camera placement and the downward looking angle can help infantalize the subject, and emphasize the small stature of younger children. Sometimes it's good to be way below the kid's height, to make them loom and look powerful, like when the kid plays in a superhero costume, or climbs a ladder or stands up tall on a set of stairs,etc.

 

[Jarrard]

If you look closely on the left side of the baby's face, it is a mess, but I did the best I could for the first time composi

SHot #6 has very strong backlight, but the child's face is in rather dim, low, indoor light. It;s not a good lighting pattern for a bright, happy expression--it needs some brightening of the child's face. And as has been mentioned, the focus is off a wee bit on it.

Overall, I think most of these are just a little bit dark, and need a bit more exposure and or brightness added in post processing; the overall look is soft, and low-contrast, which is a look I like, but think they need juuuust a touch more oomph added...maybe tick up the exposure like .7 EV or so on a couple.

The strongest one in processing and subject agreement is the one of the little girl looking down, the sepia tone shot, #4. It's a high-angle, looking-down-at-child shot, which shows her pretty hair and lovely eyelashes, and how cute she is. What parent wouldn't love to see that shot, with five other shots from that play session combined with it?

You have a good mix of camera heights and angles; on photo forums there's way too much over-emphasis on getting down to the child's level; sometimes, much of the time, that's a good idea, but it's far from being a rule one must follow; shot #4 is a good example of how the high camera placement and the downward looking angle can help infantalize the subject, and emphasize the small stature of younger children. Sometimes it's good to be way below the kid's height, to make them loom and look powerful, like when the kid plays in a superhero costume, or climbs a ladder or stands up tall on a set of stairs,etc.

Extremely wonderful feedback! I appreciate you taking this time to go into depth. I'm going to play with these some more. One thing I'm struggling with is capturing young kids that don't want to pose. (And keeping them in focus)

 

[robbins.photo]

I shot number six today. I had a hard time with him because he was moving around, and that is something I am still practicing. (Shooting kids in motion.) Easy on auto! Learning to do in manual! Haha

High shutter speed and duct tape. Works like a charm. lol