Candid of Little Brother

midnitejam · Mar 6, 2007

Suggestions and comments, please............

Model: Canon EOS 20D
Exposure Time: 1/80 sec
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO Equivalent: 100
Exposure Bias: 0
White Balance: auto
Metering Mode: average (1)
Exposure Program: manual (4)

justphotos · Mar 6, 2007

it's really cute. and it doesn't really look candid. it looks very well posed. love it.

The_Traveler · Mar 6, 2007

The sclera are decidedly blue. If this is not an artifact of the picture, this is semi-rare and should be checked out with his physician.

LaFoto · Mar 7, 2007

Does "sclera" mean the white of his eyes?
It does look bluish, though I would think it is in the photo only.

The photo is called "candid" but does not look candid, neither what his pose is concerned nor with regards to the lighting involved. Though lighting confuses me a little, there is a shadow falling to the side yet the bigger catchlight in his eyes is right there in the middle, which suggests flash on or close to the camera, but then there is a second catchlight .... where does that come from?

Have you used USM on this one?

avcabob · Mar 7, 2007

The_Traveler said:
The sclera are decidedly blue. If this is not an artifact of the picture, this is semi-rare and should be checked out with his physician.

LOL! Your comment just made my night.

Back to the picture, I think the darkness around the edges (I forget what it's called) works quite well, but I also don't understand why you call it candid.

Aquarium Dreams · Mar 7, 2007

avcabob said:
I think the darkness around the edges (I forget what it's called) works quite well

Vignetting, and I like it. This is very nice, candid or not.

The_Traveler · Mar 7, 2007

LaFoto said:
Does "sclera" mean the white of his eyes?
It does look bluish, though I would think it is in the photo only.

yes, sclera is the 'white' of the eye. Altho a bluish tint is rare, it is sometimes indicative of disease or organic defect and, if it exists, should be checked.
I reduced the blue to see if it was color balance and the picture went all wobbly. It might look blue just from the effect of the intense front light piercing the sclera but it does warrant mentioning.

mat wildlife · Mar 7, 2007

A great capture, but looks a little artificial.

midnitejam · Mar 7, 2007

LaFoto said:
Does "sclera" mean the white of his eyes?
It does look bluish, though I would think it is in the photo only.

The photo is called "candid" but does not look candid, neither what his pose is concerned nor with regards to the lighting involved. Though lighting confuses me a little, there is a shadow falling to the side yet the bigger catchlight in his eyes is right there in the middle, which suggests flash on or close to the camera, but then there is a second catchlight .... where does that come from?

Have you used USM on this one?

Thanks, everyone for the time given to the comments. I appreciate them very much. They're very important to my quest for excellance.

The sclera became over-emphasized during the post processing. A slight bluish tint in caucasian sclera is natural, but I agree that in this instance the tint is way over the top.

Lafoto, this is definitely a candid. The double-catch lights is from a hot-shoe flash with a deflecter bouncing the light into the subjects face. I used a sunpac 36DX thyristor flash. The head was swiveled upward 30 degrees. The 2nd catch light is from a built-in deflector adjusted 30 degrees toward the subject which bounced 30% of the flash from above.

The image above has the contrast boosted 'a' and 'b' channels of lab mode. And probably on an accurately calibrated monitor appears to be too saturated in the skin tones.

The image below is without the process used on the 'a' and 'b' channels. I didn't use this image because I thought it was too kool and needed warming up.

I most definitely used USM on a luminosity layer (60/20/0).

Same image but not saturated:

These are the comments I was looking for. I can't fix what isn't known to be broken.