Family shoot - C/C welcome

[Garasaki]

Hi all,

Recently did a shoot for a friend's family, who had a very photogenic young lady "C" who jumped right out of the camera for me.

I know it's a tale as old as time, but this was the first commissioned shot I did and I was very happy with how it turned out. Having said that, I'd also love some critique on these.

"B/N" - Bad positioning here resulting in blown out sky. I imagine Joe Public may not mind it, but I was curious what the reaction from this crowd is?



"C/B" - Candid, not sure I love everything going on here, except that "C" manages to dominate the scene with those eyes and sort of makes me forget about the rest of this mess



"C Lean"



"Grass Bouquet" - I rather love this one, which is only strengthened by the fact I know C's mom was in the background telling her to put that grass down as I was snapping this picture I gained an appreciation on this shoot for who actively the parents need to be managed in order to get decent pics of the kids!!

 

[tirediron]

Not bad at all for your first job. A few thoughts/questions: (1) Why the panorama aspect in #1? The grasses, image right are pretty, but they don't really add a lot, and in just increases the amount of blown sky; (2) Watch little things like the branch "growing" out of the young lady's head in #2 (easily removed in post); and (3) I really like the last one, but the cropped bottom of her right hand is slightly irritating. Overall, nicely done on the exposure; some fill would not have gone amiss, but they're acceptable as-is. I would suggest a little more work to produce consistent skin tones an WB however.

 

[Garasaki]

Thank you for your feedback tirediron!

(1) Why the panorama aspect in #1? The grasses, image right are pretty, but they don't really add a lot, and in just increases the amount of blown sky;

I find a personal preference of a wide panorama to be very pleasing. This is purely a personal thing, I realize. The original shot of this was a much "higher" shot that I struggled mightily to decide how to crop, as the original cut off just below waist level with a bunch of awkward looking hands hanging out. It felt really awkward.

I find cropping (or final composition and aspect ratio) to be a pretty interesting topic. I would love to hear how you or others might have cropped this (subjects centered, pretty tight?)

(2) Watch little things like the branch "growing" out of the young lady's head in #2 (easily removed in post)

Great point. This is the type of stuff I love learning about. I'm not exactly sure how EASY removal in post would be for me

(3) I really like the last one, but the cropped bottom of her right hand is slightly irritating.

Yeah, I messed that up on the original composition Was curious how obvious that was

 

[Braineack]

let's see the first two at the original aspect ratio. it's not a very pleasing crop imho -- looks like it was cropped odd for a web banner.

I couldn't care less about a blown out sky. Until a camera sensor can expose for both the subject and the sky at the same time -- you have to live with that without supplemental lighting.

 

[Garasaki]

I agree that it has a bit of a web banner feel.

Originals (I had a sneaky feeling I should have posted the originals after asking about how others might have cropped em)

 

[paigew]

The original crops are much better, your clients would have a hard time printing/framing such a long skinny crop like in your op. I think the shots are very nice, I might have culled the “candid” one. Not enough connection for me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Derrel]

The original crops are much better, your clients would have a hard time printing/framing such a long skinny crop like in your op. I think the shots are very nice, I might have culled the “candid” one. Not enough connection for me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Agreed on both counts.

 

[Garasaki]

I think the shots are very nice, I might have culled the “candid” one. Not enough connection for me.

Would appreciate if you (or someone) would expand on "connection" in this context? Betwixt (wow is that actually a word??) the subjects in the photo, or betwixt the subjects and the camera?

 

[SquarePeg]

Both or neither not sure which is the correct way to answer that. You only have one subject making eye contact with the camera. The other two are not looking at anything in particular, the other girl has her eyes closed. Usually for me a portrait of multiple subjects works if the subjects are looking into the camera or at each other or some combination of the two. Or if it’s a couple or single looking dreamily off camera.

 

[Derrel]

I think the shots are very nice, I might have culled the “candid” one. Not enough connection for me.

Would appreciate if you (or someone) would expand on "connection" in this context? Betwixt (wow is that actually a word??) the subjects in the photo, or betwixt the subjects and the camera?

Betwixt:
be·twixt
bəˈtwikst/
preposition & adverb

1. archaic term for between.
   
   So yes, betwixt is indeed a word. And there is little connection betwixt the three subjects: the older daughter appears mid-eye blink, eyes closed, and her head position is directed 180 degrees off-camera, to the extreme camera right; the father appears to have his eyes downcast and looking back and behind the camera; the younger daughter is looking directly ahead and right at the camera lens. In this manner, the group of three is disconnected, extremely. Only one of the three is looking anywhere near the camera position. So, there's not any unification or connection of the three portrait subjects, either with the camera, nor as a unified unit of three people. They are not shown in a harmonious connection with one another, nor with the camera.
   
   In formal portraiture of groups, at the studios I used to work at, we strove mightily for a unified eye gaze, with each person looking more or less the same direction, and at the photographer, just off to the side of the lens; in those days, the goal was that each person be shown not directly looking into the lens, but looking near the lens-that was the preferred line of gaze for formal family pictures in those days. The photo shown lacks connection betwixt the group members, and betwixt the group and the camera.

 

[Donde]

I also find interesting images of a group (well two or more) where one individual is looking at another who is looking at the camera.