Attempt number 2&3 at a portrait :)

[BNHPhotography]

I promised a C&C image on Sunday, but after having a flat tire on the interstate, waiting for 2 hours, and then having a friend break a diving board and puncture the pool liner, i'm FINALLY posting an image! It's only Tuesday and it has been a crazy week.

1.

If i had it to do over, i would've made a tighter shot.

2.

Looking for a thought on this picture, too. In my last thread everyone talked about taking a portrait shot, in PORTRAIT position, is this one that actually looks good horizontally?

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

The whole portrait/landscape thing has some nuance to it that you will pick up over time.

Your first shot here should have been landscape, you cut off limbs arbitrarily. If you go portrait with something similar to that one, you would go in tight and be cutting lots off, filling the frame with subject. If your subjects are short and wide, go landscape. If they are tall and thin, portrait. That is at it's most BASIC.

The second one, you either could pull back some, or go portrait to catch more of their bodies, more of her holding him.

Images of just heads like that are kinda awkward.I will repeat, that there are no straight forward rules or guidelines to this. But as you develop your eye for it, you will make better decisions.

On number two, do you think we need to see so much of the womans hair? Is it all important? Or could you stand to cut some of that off? Her thumb is in the image. Is that important? Could you stand to see more of the hand? Would more hand help tell a "story", or more hair?

 

[mrpink]

If i had it to do over, i would've made a tighter shot.

This is why every editing program on earth has a crop feature.






p!nK

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I don't think you are going to find a pleasing crop from the first image. It's one that I would toss.

 

[BNHPhotography]

I didn't want to crop it and make it an odd size =/
@Bitter Jewler: Thanks for the input, i was so caught up in vertical shots, vertical shots, vertical shots! I have one that's horizontal, but the little girl isn't looking straight at the camera like this one =/

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

What are your answers to the questions at the bottom of my post?

 

[BNHPhotography]

Definately more hand. I need to learn how to sllllowwww dowwwwnnnn when i'm taking pictures, and get everything in that i want too. It takes a little while for the picture butterflies to settle =/

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Ok. Good.

That's why I say there is nuance to the land vs. port thing.

By my basic rule, two heads side by side are short and wide, but it doesn't work.

 

[BNHPhotography]

I'll definately remember that!

 

[oldmacman]

I didn't want to crop it and make it an odd size =/
@Bitter Jewler: Thanks for the input, i was so caught up in vertical shots, vertical shots, vertical shots! I have one that's horizontal, but the little girl isn't looking straight at the camera like this one =/

It doesn't have to be an odd size, you can keep the same aspect. I hope you don't mind, but I was in the mood for some editing and applied the crop and a few other tweaks. I love the gaze of the older sister peeking behind the baby's head.

 

[kundalini]

Bitter has made you answer some good questions. These will eventually become part of your routine when composing shots. In the meantime, I'll suggest you do two things. 1) Shoot fat so that you can get a good comp using the crop tool. Giving yourself some extra pixels all around and still achieving a RoT crop eases the pressure and will give you more wins. 2) Shoot both a vertical and a horizontal of the same scene. This will help you start to understand those nuances Bitter was talking about.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Methinks you went tooooooo far.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Here are my salvage attempts.
I think your posted images are too saturated, and in this first one, I backed out the reds, and yellows.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Edit: Fixed image, reposted.

 

[BNHPhotography]

Thanks guys! I like both edits, but the dreamy look of the first one is bit much for my taste, but it still looks interesting! So, this is such a stupid question, I know you all probably use photoshop to edit with, i use lightroom, is there a way to tell how large your image is so it won't be a weird, unframable size?