Baby Pics for C&C

WhiskeyTango · Jan 16, 2012

Hello all! I've posted a couple of times in the Photo Challenge board, but this'll be my first here.

I'm aware of my newb-hood, have thick skin, and genuinely want to learn.

Without further ado, I offer the following as fodder:

Alright. Pool's open! Jump on in!

WhiskeyTango

GeorgieGirl · Jan 16, 2012

#1 Compostion is off....#2 is a good one!...Not sure what color your background actually is but in the photo I think Ild like to see white if it was.

PappyRoot · Jan 16, 2012

Cute Cute Cute. As a Noob, I think it all looks good. But, I am still learning. Thank you for sharing

j_mejia17 · Jan 16, 2012

I also love the second one. What a great, natural expression from the mother and the baby. The first one is cropped too tight. Sharp though.

shutterbugmomma · Jan 16, 2012

Let me preface this by saying I am a newbie as well, so take everything I say with a grain of salt.

#1 - Baby is cute! The crop is too tight. You actually cut off a tiny bit of her ear. Her eyes look rather flat. I would like them to look brighter/less shadow on the upper face.
#2 - From another baby wearer, I think this is adorable! However, it appears to be OOF to me.

WhiskeyTango · Jan 16, 2012

j_mejia17 said:
I also love the second one. What a great, natural expression from the mother and the baby. The first one is cropped too tight. Sharp though.

Yeah, I knew the crop was too tight, but that was in-camera, so I couldn't do anything with it in post... I would like to have been about .8x on that and have pushed her head a little more left and down.

WhiskeyTango · Jan 16, 2012

shutterbugmomma said:
Let me preface this by saying I am a newbie as well, so take everything I say with a grain of salt. #1 - Baby is cute! The crop is too tight. You actually cut off a tiny bit of her ear. Her eyes look rather flat. I would like them to look brighter/less shadow on the upper face.#2 - From another baby wearer, I think this is adorable! However, it appears to be OOF to me.

Definitely thanks for the feedback!I had my AF point on the baby's closest eye, but it definitely isn't as sharp as the first photo. I'm guessing I either moved more than intended to before firing the release, or the mild noise reduction I did in post was too heavy handed.FWIW: The first shot was on a tripod, ISO 200. The second was handheld ISO 400.

WhiskeyTango · Jan 16, 2012

GeorgieGirl said:
#1 Compostion is off....#2 is a good one!...Not sure what color your background actually is but in the photo I think Ild like to see white if it was.

Actual "backgrounds" are on my near-term wish list. That's my basement wall, and on my monitor is pretty close (just a bit more green in the image than real life). My monitor isn't high-end, but it is calibrated.WhiskeyTango

The_Traveler · Jan 16, 2012

You've heard about the first.
I think the second is really nice.
Very sharp, good color, a wee bit too bright I think.
And, most of all, I think there's too much there.

Rotating a bit and cropping will put both the mom and baby on the thirds and make a really nice tight shot.

JenR · Jan 16, 2012

I'm not sure how you lit the first one. If it was a light on a stand, I would try lowering the light a smidge next time. You have a nice light ratio and good white balance. The first is underexposed, though. The Traveler gave you some great advice about your second shot.

WhiskeyTango · Jan 16, 2012

The_Traveler said:
You've heard about the first.I think the second is really nice.Very sharp, good color, a wee bit too bright I think.And, most of all, I think there's too much there.Rotating a bit and cropping will put both the mom and baby on the thirds and make a really nice tight shot.

Wow! What a difference! Thank you for the insight!I had already cropped it, but only slightly. I didn't think about rotating it.WhiskeyTango

WhiskeyTango · Jan 16, 2012

JenR said:
I'm not sure how you lit the first one. If it was a light on a stand, I would try lowering the light a smidge next time. You have a nice light ratio and good white balance. The first is underexposed, though. The Traveler gave you some great advice about your second shot.

JenR, thanks for the pointer! It is indeed a light on a stand. A shoot-through umbrella to be specific. Now that you point it out, the catch lights are a bit high. I will definitely play with it a bit.The models are my sister and her daughter, so there's plenty of re-shoot potential.WhiskeyTango

RebeccaAPhotography · Jan 16, 2012

WhiskeyTango said:
Definitely thanks for the feedback!I had my AF point on the baby's closest eye, but it definitely isn't as sharp as the first photo. I'm guessing I either moved more than intended to before firing the release, or the mild noise reduction I did in post was too heavy handed.FWIW: The first shot was on a tripod, ISO 200. The second was handheld ISO 400.

What was your shutter speed and your aperture? I'm viewing from an iPhone but the first looks like it focused on the nose and the 2nd is oof. Might just be myphone tho.

RebeccaAPhotography · Jan 16, 2012

The_Traveler said:
You've heard about the first.
I think the second is really nice.
Very sharp, good color, a wee bit too bright I think.
And, most of all, I think there's too much there.

Rotating a bit and cropping will put both the mom and baby on the thirds and make a really nice tight shot.

See when I look at your post even tho it's her pic it's def not oof!

Darn I phone!! Ican not wait for my laptop to come back from repair shop!