delicious C&C please:)

[fotomumma09]

ISO 2000 2.8 1/100
Thanks for looking!

 

[cgipson1]

So what do you consider delicious? The blown out highlights? The OOF eyelashes on the lower eye, or the OOF hair? The tight framing with cropped ear, head and hair? Just curious!

 

[JAC526]

So what do you consider delicious? The blown out highlights? The OOF eyelashes on the lower eye, or the OOF hair? The tight framing with cropped ear, head and hair? Just curious!

This is the sarcastic superior response that so many people ***** about. I'm not saying your critique is incorrect. I'm saying the way you present it makes you out to be an *******. When I know you're really not an *******.

 

[fotomumma09]

So what do you consider delicious? The blown out highlights? The OOF eyelashes on the lower eye, or the OOF hair? The tight framing with cropped ear, head and hair? Just curious!

So what do you really think Charlie? lol

Okay, so definitely not thrilled about the crop. I am regretting the 50 mm on the APS-C. But I really don't mind the OOF lower eyelashes as I'm drawn to the top eye. However I would have liked both eyes to be in focus. As far as the blown out highlights, do you think it ever works artistically in an image?

I guess (apart from the crop) I like the feel of this image and the softness of his skin and eyelashes have great detail. I know I have A LOT to learn but for the skill level I am at I really like this. Is there anything positive about it in your opinion?

 

[ceejtank]

Photo - what you have to remember is Photo's are a form of art, and much like i wouldn't pay $1 to own a picasso cause I think they're crap.. beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The picture most likley has a sentimental value, and most people who don't look at technical aspects in such detail would find the photo endearing. I think its a nice shot, yes tehre are some technical flaws (my issue is with the crop) but I like the light/dark of it. The blown out highlights to me remind me a little of hope, not sure why.

I like the pic.

 

[TheDeeDouble]

I'm new to photography but have some experience in other visual arts so take this with a grain of salt. The DOF could be better, but it doesn't ruin the photo as is. The crop doesn't bother me either. I don't really need to see the ears nor rest of the head because I just assume that they are there. The crop doesn't give me the impression that something's "wrong" with the subject. I am sensitive to the blown out highlights though.

 

[The_Traveler]

It is endearing because some viewers are filling in all that is missing with their own memories and projecting those memories on this picture.

But the picture itself doesn't have the characteristics.
The histogram below shows the distribution of tones. There is much that is burnt out, much that is almost blocked in and not much in the middle.
At an f stop of 2.8 and with the 'target' at an angle your DOF is about 1.5 inches so a lot will be OOF.

If you want to show a cute face, show a face, not hair.
With a sleeping baby you could have shot this at 1/25 using a chair or something else as a temp aid to hold steady.
Diffuse the light with something like cheesecloth.
Learn to expose to get the delicate tones you want and that will make this more successful.


Focal Length: 50.0mm
Aperture: f/2.8
Exposure Time: 0.010 s (1/100)
ISO equiv: 2000
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual

 

[amolitor]

I think it captures a particular parental feeling quite well:

That sensation of having your baby tucked up close to you, tucked up under your chin on your chest or under your arm against you in a chair. It's that feeling of being intensely near. The tight crop and the out of focus elements support this. Imagine if it was all in focus and sharp? That's not intimate at all -- when my daughter's face is jammed up to mine, I can't focus on it.

The lightness cheeks are slightly blown out, but the higher tones roll off pretty well here. A touch more exposure would have been nice, perhaps, but getting those super light, super smooth baby/kid skin textures is going to be tough if you shoot them as grey instead of white. It's just processing, so it's doable. I don't mind the blown highlights, anyways.

The fabrics frame right are a little confusing. Is the striped stuff a sweater, or a blanket? It's a little intrusive. I wouldn't mind it being a little softer.

 

[Derrel]

This thread is the perfect microcosm of TPF C&C threads. Props to fotomumma99 for the steely,calm response. Props to Lew for his patient and steady C&C and for making a screen cap that shows what overexposure looks like at the histogram view.

 

[amolitor]

It is endearing because some viewers are filling in all that is missing with their own memories and projecting those memories on this picture.

But that's most of what many successful photographs DO...

Good photographs evoke. This photograph evokes. Technical details be damned.

ETA: I am happy as a clam to agree to disagree on this. The technical C&C are all perfectly correct, the ONLY point we differ on is how much that matters, and I am totally uninterested in fighting about it. Ok, except for this post. Ooops. I promise to stop here.

 

[Derrel]

It is endearing because some viewers are filling in all that is missing with their own memories and projecting those memories on this picture.

But that's most of what many successful photographs DO...

Good photographs evoke. This photograph evokes. Technical details be damned.

This photo evokes, "Damn! I overexposed the daylights outta' that shot! Oh,well,maybe I can salvage my major mistake it by converting it to black and white!"

THAT is what this kind of shot evokes to me. INSTANT "OOOPS!!!!!" Or.....am I perhaps simply projecting my own recollections of being a newbie digital shooter onto this person's work??? Hmmmmm....

 

[cgipson1]

So what do you consider delicious? The blown out highlights? The OOF eyelashes on the lower eye, or the OOF hair? The tight framing with cropped ear, head and hair? Just curious!

So what do you really think Charlie? lol

Okay, so definitely not thrilled about the crop. I am regretting the 50 mm on the APS-C. But I really don't mind the OOF lower eyelashes as I'm drawn to the top eye. However I would have liked both eyes to be in focus. As far as the blown out highlights, do you think it ever works artistically in an image?

I guess (apart from the crop) I like the feel of this image and the softness of his skin and eyelashes have great detail. I know I have A LOT to learn but for the skill level I am at I really like this. Is there anything positive about it in your opinion?

Thank you for your answer... I apologize if that sounded overly harsh. I really was curious about what you liked about the shot! I also think you know enough to know how to correct each of the issues with the shot, if you take them one at a time and think about it. If you need assistance, please ask.

It is a somewhat cute shot...but I find one eye sharp, one eye OOF distracting.... The highlights are not as bad as they could be, and they are even enough not to be a distraction in themselves. I find the angle of the shot and the OOF hair to not be optimal either. The crop being so tight is almost doable in emphasizing the face. Any ONE of those things might have been forgivable.. but combined, they override whatever is good about the image IMO. Does that make sense? I do think you can do better....

 

[The_Traveler]

Every successful image counts on some contribution from the viewer in terms of shared experience and emotion.

The best images will appeal to basic shared human feelings and emotions that all or most of us have and don't depend so much on life specific feelings that the viewer must contribute to make the connection.

I don't care or remember the cuddly, oogly stuff of babies, can't contribute that emotion and so I need the image to go further along the path of being 'good' than perhaps a mother of five would.
On the other hand, pictures of temples in Myanmar almost make me mist up because I love that country and treasure my experiences and memories so much.

On 'mommy' sites, any pictures will do.
On a photo site like TPF, aim for the technically, emotionally more complete images that will please even non-interested viewers.

 

[fotomumma09]

Wow! Thank you all for your responses! Lew, I really appreciate you taking the time to show the light on the histogram...I actually didn't even look at the histogram of the shot which is unusual for me.

Charlie, I don't take any offense to your first post, in fact I actually laughed out loud! You are blunt and sarcastic (at least that's what I think was your intended response) and appreciate that. I don't offend easily.

To be honest I converted to B/W because the colours of the blanket and his shirt competed with the subject. He looks like an angel but when I was trying to take the shot he was being a stinker and rolling around so I got the shot that I could at the moment.

Thank you again for your C&C, I really do take good advice and put it to use!

 

[cgipson1]

So what do you consider delicious? The blown out highlights? The OOF eyelashes on the lower eye, or the OOF hair? The tight framing with cropped ear, head and hair? Just curious!

This is the sarcastic superior response that so many people ***** about. I'm not saying your critique is incorrect. I'm saying the way you present it makes you out to be an *******. When I know you're really not an *******.

I can guarantee my response made the OP look at the image, and hopefully think about the image. A softer, more gentle approach may have done that too.... but I am seeing the same issues repeatedly, and wanted to call attention to that!