First attempt at portraits

[honoryourlife]

Personally, the photos don't do much for me and they look quite soft. But that might be my eyes, they're pretty bad! But you already know this.

 

[blackrose89]

Personally, the photos don't do much for me and they look quite soft. But that might be my eyes, they're pretty bad! But you already know this.

#3 & #4 are badly soft. #1 & #2 (especially #2) are much sharper Especially compared to the soft focus of my previous posts. Of course there is always room for improvement and by next post I will have played with settings and gotten to know my camera much more.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

In the first one, the horse head merges with the trees into a large blobby mass. The building and stuff in the background of all of these keeps them all in the realm of snapshots. Your cropping and composition is awkward in all 4 images. You are cutting and clipping body parts with no rhyme or reason. PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR BACKGROUND, in #2 the horse is wearing a palm tree hat. #1 was screaming for portrait orientation, and including their whole bodies.

Yes, you can cut through body parts. It's not a sin. It has to be done artfully though. I believe, between a full body shot and a close up, you have to get through the no mans land of awkward crops. There may be one in-between crop that works, but it all depends how your subject is framed, and how the overall image is balanced. All your images here are rather bottom heavy.

 

[unpopular]

there should be a low prohibiting people from wearing cowboy getup east of the mississippi. otherwise, a good start.

 

[Desi]

Congrats on the new DSRL....it's a whole new world to learn.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Also, try to maintain standard aspect ratios. They are tried and true for a reason. They are visually "comfortable" for one. Another great reason, is if you don't use standard crop ratios, your "clients" are forced to get custom frames, rather than the cheaper ready-mares from Wal-Mart.

 

[blackrose89]

there should be a low prohibiting people from wearing cowboy getup east of the mississippi. otherwise, a good start.

He acutally is from the country side. Wasn't raised in Florida.

 

[unpopular]

lol. i was only teasing. Though the idea of a 'ranch' in Florida kind of made me chuckle.

 

[blackrose89]

In the first one, the horse head merges with the trees into a large blobby mass. The building and stuff in the background of all of these keeps them all in the realm of snapshots. Your cropping and composition is awkward in all 4 images. You are cutting and clipping body parts with no rhyme or reason. PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR BACKGROUND, in #2 the horse is wearing a palm tree hat. #1 was screaming for portrait orientation, and including their whole bodies.

Yes, you can cut through body parts. It's not a sin. It has to be done artfully though. I believe, between a full body shot and a close up, you have to get through the no mans land of awkward crops. There may be one in-between crop that works, but it all depends how your subject is framed, and how the overall image is balanced. All your images here are rather bottom heavy.

Thanks. I know you like to hear what the author of a photo thinks of their photo. In case you missed here is what I said earlier

Personally, I don't mind the saturation, especially in the first 2. I really have very few problems with the first two. #2 would be better if the palm trees were perfectly framed around the subjects (So I already caught that the palm tree was growing out of his head), but I got as close as I could. #1, I guess a vertical portait would work better, but I still like it and believe the good outweighs the bad and I believe I have him pretty nicely framed between the greenery. The last 2 I liked the compositions and the angles had potential, but the softness and loss of details kill it for me. And for those who said I had a distracting background, you don't have a clue. Outside of the fences were just broken down trailers, 10 feet tall piles of manure, rusted dirty barrels etc. This is was the best option to shoot from and despite what you see, actually had the least amount that was obtrusive in the background.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Thanks. I know you like to hear what the author of a photo thinks of their photo. In case you missed here is what I said earlier

Personally, I don't mind the saturation, especially in the first 2. I really have very few problems with the first two. #2 would be better if the palm trees were perfectly framed around the subjects (So I already caught that the palm tree was growing out of his head), but I got as close as I could. #1, I guess a vertical portait would work better, but I still like it and believe the good outweighs the bad and I believe I have him pretty nicely framed between the greenery. The last 2 I liked the compositions and the angles had potential, but the softness and loss of details kill it for me. And for those who said I had a distracting background, you don't have a clue. Outside of the fences were just broken down trailers, 10 feet tall piles of manure, rusted dirty barrels etc. This is was the best option to shoot from and despite what you see, actually had the least amount that was obtrusive in the background.

Oh, but I did read that, thus my response.

In the first one, the horse head merges with the trees into a large blobby mass. The building and stuff in the background of all of these keeps them all in the realm of snapshots. Your cropping and composition is awkward in all 4 images. You are cutting and clipping body parts with no rhyme or reason. PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR BACKGROUND, in #2 the horse is wearing a palm tree hat. #1 was screaming for portrait orientation, and including their whole bodies.

Yes, you can cut through body parts. It's not a sin. It has to be done artfully though. I believe, between a full body shot and a close up, you have to get through the no mans land of awkward crops. There may be one in-between crop that works, but it all depends how your subject is framed, and how the overall image is balanced. All your images here are rather bottom heavy.

You can do with it as you wish.

 

[blackrose89]

lol. i was only teasing. Though the idea of a 'ranch' in Florida kind of made me chuckle.

No problem. People in south Florida with "ranches" laugh too. But no, on a serious note, there is actually quite a bit of country side here, wide open spaces and serenity here, especially further north. driving on the turnpike I've seen road kill Alligators (no shock), deer, Wolves, and even a mountain lion.

 

[blackrose89]

Not being defensive, I'm really asking, what am I suppose to about the background? I picked the spot with the least amount in the background and my subjects wanted to shoot in this arena. What more could I have done, so I know for the future?

Thanks. I know you like to hear what the author of a photo thinks of their photo. In case you missed here is what I said earlier

Personally, I don't mind the saturation, especially in the first 2. I really have very few problems with the first two. #2 would be better if the palm trees were perfectly framed around the subjects (So I already caught that the palm tree was growing out of his head), but I got as close as I could. #1, I guess a vertical portait would work better, but I still like it and believe the good outweighs the bad and I believe I have him pretty nicely framed between the greenery. The last 2 I liked the compositions and the angles had potential, but the softness and loss of details kill it for me. And for those who said I had a distracting background, you don't have a clue. Outside of the fences were just broken down trailers, 10 feet tall piles of manure, rusted dirty barrels etc. This is was the best option to shoot from and despite what you see, actually had the least amount that was obtrusive in the background.

Oh, but I did read that, thus my response.

In the first one, the horse head merges with the trees into a large blobby mass. The building and stuff in the background of all of these keeps them all in the realm of snapshots. Your cropping and composition is awkward in all 4 images. You are cutting and clipping body parts with no rhyme or reason. PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR BACKGROUND, in #2 the horse is wearing a palm tree hat. #1 was screaming for portrait orientation, and including their whole bodies.

Yes, you can cut through body parts. It's not a sin. It has to be done artfully though. I believe, between a full body shot and a close up, you have to get through the no mans land of awkward crops. There may be one in-between crop that works, but it all depends how your subject is framed, and how the overall image is balanced. All your images here are rather bottom heavy.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

If you are going for "nice" portraits, you don't shoot there, or you edit the crap out.

 

[blackrose89]

If you are going for "nice" portraits, you don't shoot there, or you edit the crap out.

Can you make up your mind? Last time I editted stuff out you blasted me for it. LOL Soooo just kidding.

 

[Vtec44]

Not being defensive, I'm really asking, what am I suppose to about the background? I picked the spot with the least amount in the background and my subjects wanted to shoot in this arena. What more could I have done, so I know for the future?

From what I read, generally you want to keep the background as out of focus as possible for portraiture and you want to keep the background in focus for story telling. Of course there are exception to the rule, ie interesting background. For the most part, people don't really care about what you had to work with but only the result. The result in this case is that your background is distracting, regardless of what you had to work with.