A little bit of Rain never stopped us! C&C please

[splproductions]

I completely agree with the 1.4 aperture stuff that is being said... when my first boy was born I did all of his photos at 1.4 or 1.8, and I can't tell you how badly I regret that. Like Geaux said, they look great small, but once you see it larger you realize you missed the focus. I also thought I liked a lot of sharpening on my eyes, and I did it routinely on all my portraits. Once I started shooting stopped down a bit (closer to f/4 most of the time), I realized I didn't need this sharpening because my eyes were nice and sharp to begin with. I used to use all these "tricks" I learned from Kelby books with editing eyes - I'd spend a long time on them. But the more I learn and the better I get, the less and less I'm doing with my eyes, and the more I like how they turn out. I still probably touch them up too much, and I'm sure as I progress I'll look back and think, "What was I doing?!!"

I also agree with what has been said regarding composition.

Regarding the photos being "too hot" or the "cinema quality processing"... I've already had problems with people telling me my photos are too hot, so maybe my screen isn't calibrated properly or something... but is this "too hot" look just a style that some people like and some people don't? Because I personally don't see anything wrong with the way the colors are or the amount of "pop" that they have. I love this aspect of these photographs. Then again, most people on this forum know a lot more than I do... so I partly bring this up to hear others opinions and to learn a thing or two.

 

[CorrieMichael]

You've definitely got a style going on here, and that's a good thing, make no mistake. These pictures look like they were made very deliberately, and they use some "pro photographer" tropes like shallow DoF and so on, so it's instantly clear to everyone that these are pictures that were made like this, on purpose, by someone in command of the technical side of things. That's a big part of what "style" is about.

Unfortunately, this conceals something. Because we look and we see a bunch of technical stuff, a bunch of style choices, a bunch of signs that these are Carefully And Well Made we miss that the subject is simply banged in the middle of the frame every time. You're not spending much effort at all on the part of the process where you choose what goes into the frame and, more importantly, where it goes in the frame and what else goes into the frame with it.

Is this a bad thing? Eh. I dunno. You have a heck of a good subject so it's certainly not the end of the world. A good subject banged in the middle of the frame is a fine picture much of the time.

I do think you could make stronger pictures with better framing choices, and a better "whole image" approach. You'd be hampered by the extreme shallow DoF you favor, since everything else in the frame is likely to turn up as fuzzy blobs of color. On the other hand, some fuzzy blobs of color, light, and darkness -- well placed -- would not be amiss themselves.

Just to be clear, you've got a lot of good stuff going on here. I just happen to think there's some specific things you could do to push your pictures up a notch.

WOW! Thank you! I love this feedback, makes me feel progressed and achieving goals but something to work towards! Thanks again! I will keep all these things in mind and try not to get too caught up in the moment and think things through a little bit more!

 

[CorrieMichael]

I once had a "style" too, then I eventually learned how to properly make a photo. Keep shooting.

Thanks......I'll nail it one of these days.....I swear......and you will all be very surprised lol ;P

 

[Ballistics]

I once had a "style" too, then I eventually learned how to properly make a photo. Keep shooting.

You just don't have the chops to be talking to people like this. Straight up.

 

[runnah]

You just don't have the chops to be talking to people like this. Straight up.

I like you.

 

[Ballistics]

I completely agree with the 1.4 aperture stuff that is being said... when my first boy was born I did all of his photos at 1.4 or 1.8, and I can't tell you how badly I regret that. Like Geaux said, they look great small, but once you see it larger you realize you missed the focus. I also thought I liked a lot of sharpening on my eyes, and I did it routinely on all my portraits. Once I started shooting stopped down a bit (closer to f/4 most of the time), I realized I didn't need this sharpening because my eyes were nice and sharp to begin with. I used to use all these "tricks" I learned from Kelby books with editing eyes - I'd spend a long time on them. But the more I learn and the better I get, the less and less I'm doing with my eyes, and the more I like how they turn out. I still probably touch them up too much, and I'm sure as I progress I'll look back and think, "What was I doing?!!"

Closing down the aperture doesn't fix missed focus. It just makes it less obvious. When you shoot wide open, you also need to make sure that your lens isn't in need of a calibration.
You can even have an entire person in focus at 1.4, it just matters how far away you are.

Online Depth of Field Calculator

Regarding the photos being "too hot" or the "cinema quality processing"

The cinema quality processing and too hot are not one in the same. My comment about the color grading (the cinema style processing) was positive. It's a style.