Do my pictures look soft?

morganleigh · Jan 12, 2009

if so, any tips on what I need to do differently? I shot with a canon 30D and a 50mm f/1.8 or a 28mm f/1.8. I do not have the info for each picture with me, but I kept the shutter speed above 1/60 and the aperture above 2.8.

ANDS! · Jan 12, 2009

"Soft" is subjective. The fourth shot is soft, but it works for me. It is an intimate moment between mommy and baby - the hard edged sharpness of tone seperation might or might not have enhanced the shot. It doesn't take away from it though.

In number two, the shot is sharp in the right places and doesn't take away from the portrait.

Number one and number three do seem a little not sharp, but again, they aren't deal-breakingly so, and don't take away from the subject. Plus, you can get away with a little softness with the babes.

morganleigh · Jan 12, 2009

ANDS! said:
"Soft" is subjective. The fourth shot is soft, but it works for me. It is an intimate moment between mommy and baby - the hard edged sharpness of tone seperation might or might not have enhanced the shot. It doesn't take away from it though.

In number two, the shot is sharp in the right places and doesn't take away from the portrait.

Number one and number three do seem a little not sharp, but again, they aren't deal-breakingly so, and don't take away from the subject. Plus, you can get away with a little softness with the babes.

thanks for the review. I was very happy with these pictures, but just got the feedback that they were soft. Maybe it is a personal preference, but I do like a little softness with babies. I try to avoid sharpening or adding too much clarity with a baby.

I have only been doing this 7 months so I really want to make sure I'm on the right track. If there is something else technically wrong with these pictures, I would like to know so I can learn how to fix the problems.

ANDS! · Jan 12, 2009

Are these not pictures of your kid?

morganleigh · Jan 12, 2009

ANDS! said:
Are these not pictures of your kid?

no, they are a friend's kid.

ANDS! · Jan 12, 2009

If they are someones elses kid, then it doesn't really matter if its soft or not to you - it only matters what they want. A lot of people go for these slightly sharp, high key shots of kids - its the "style". This fellows work for example. I suppose it all depends on what aesthetic you are trying to put out there. . .

morganleigh · Jan 12, 2009

ANDS! said:
If they are someones elses kid, then it doesn't really matter if its soft or not to you - it only matters what they want. A lot of people go for these slightly sharp, high key shots of kids - its the "style". This fellows work for example. I suppose it all depends on what aesthetic you are trying to put out there. . .

The mom loved them. Someone else said they looked soft, but they are also a fairly new photographer so I wanted to get other opinions. I am happy with them and the mom is happy, but I still want to make sure I have good technique. maybe they were just not this other person's style.

ANDS! · Jan 12, 2009

Number 2 and Number 4 are clear winners. Number 1 and Number 3 are not losers, but they wouldn't be on my short list for printing out, or for use as "samples" of my work.

morganleigh · Jan 12, 2009

ANDS! said:
This fellows work for example. I suppose it all depends on what aesthetic you are trying to put out there. . .

yes, that is definitly a different style than what I do. It looks like they are using flash or studio lights. The pictures are great, just different. I do like a soft, natural light and rarely use flash.

I am glad to know my softness is a matter of style or preference, not an error in my technique. The critique I got made me concerned that the pictures were not good.

I am still developing my skills and style so it really helps to get feedback to make sure I'm not missing something key.

morganleigh · Jan 13, 2009

I did more sharpening to the pictures. do you like the original version or the version with more sharpening?

5original

5Sharpened more

6original

6Sharpened more

7original

7Sharpened more

8original

8Sharpened more

morganleigh · Jan 13, 2009

hmmm, they don't look very different in this small size.

Parago · Jan 13, 2009

IMHO, only teh last one looks better after sharpening. In teh first three, all it did was increase the amount of noise.

One tiny piece of advice in regards to other people's opinions: I personally don't think that 'all that matters is what THEY want', even if they're paying customers. YOU have to be the one standing behind your art/product; at the end of the day it's YOU who has to go to bed satisfied with your day's work and YOU need to feel good about what you're creating.

If you're always trying to make everyone happy, you'll never get anywhere; don't let some random person's vague criticism nurture any kind of insecurity within you.

Honest, open, and detailed TECHNICAL advice is what you need to look for and be open to - ignore soundbites like 'too soft/too hard', 'too saturated/too pale', etc. Those are matters of personal preference but have nothing to do with the actual quality of your art/product.

I love number 2 in the original post, btw.

Samanax · Jan 13, 2009

Part of the reason some of the pictures appear soft is the noise you're getting in them...noise breaks down image details. And sharpening will increase/exaggerate noise in an image. Higher ISO will produce a more noisy image. Lower ISO will produce a less noisy image. If you're shooting indoors with only ambient light and it's kind of dark you're going to have to use a higher ISO and will get noise in your image. There are things you can do to reduce the amount of noise...be very aware of where the light is coming from and make sure you use it to light your subject properly. You can use reflectors (white cardboard or foam core) to take light coming from a windows and use it to lighten shadows on your subject. Using a very fast lens will help a lot...this means using prime lenses instead of zooms since prime lenses have much larger aperture openings. Many lenses are not their sharpest when shot wide open (bigger aperture)...keep this in mind when setting up your camera, it'll help give you a softer look to your images (but remember DOF will be very shallow).

The composition in your pictures is good. Keep shooting and keep the light source and direction in mind when you set up the shot.

morganleigh · Jan 13, 2009

Samanax said:
Part of the reason some of the pictures appear soft is the noise you're getting in them...noise breaks down image details. And sharpening will increase/exaggerate noise in an image. Higher ISO will produce a more noisy image. Lower ISO will produce a less noisy image. If you're shooting indoors with only ambient light and it's kind of dark you're going to have to use a higher ISO and will get noise in your image. There are things you can do to reduce the amount of noise...be very aware of where the light is coming from and make sure you use it to light your subject properly. You can use reflectors (white cardboard or foam core) to take light coming from a windows and use it to lighten shadows on your subject. Using a very fast lens will help a lot...this means using prime lenses instead of zooms since prime lenses have much larger aperture openings. Many lenses are not their sharpest when shot wide open (bigger aperture)...keep this in mind when setting up your camera, it'll help give you a softer look to your images (but remember DOF will be very shallow).

The composition in your pictures is good. Keep shooting and keep the light source and direction in mind when you set up the shot.

thanks. yes, I was very worried about the amount of noise. I have not purchased noise reducing software yet, because I'm still deciding on which to get. I will probably buy neat image this week. My ISO was at 1000. It was a very overcast day and we were inside or on a shaded patio.

This was a pretty casual shoot with a mom & child we were staying in a cabin with. In this type of situation, I feel awkward bringing out reflectors and really setting up the shot. I am very hesitant to take a lot of pictures, but I'm getting comfortable with that because I know people enjoy having them. I would have loved to have spent more time photographing this girl, but I felt like it wasn't a photo shoot so I needed to limit myself.

morganleigh · Jan 13, 2009

Parago said:
IMHO, only teh last one looks better after sharpening. In teh first three, all it did was increase the amount of noise.

One tiny piece of advice in regards to other people's opinions: I personally don't think that 'all that matters is what THEY want', even if they're paying customers. YOU have to be the one standing behind your art/product; at the end of the day it's YOU who has to go to bed satisfied with your day's work and YOU need to feel good about what you're creating.

If you're always trying to make everyone happy, you'll never get anywhere; don't let some random person's vague criticism nurture any kind of insecurity within you.

Honest, open, and detailed TECHNICAL advice is what you need to look for and be open to - ignore soundbites like 'too soft/too hard', 'too saturated/too pale', etc. Those are matters of personal preference but have nothing to do with the actual quality of your art/product.

I love number 2 in the original post, btw.