http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a8/tat2me2/kids%20people%2011/cloudsmiah.jpg

tat2me2 · Sep 29, 2005

for these, no PS was used, and just for the purpose of critiques...these were taken with a point and shoot (so i can't change the shutter speed or ANYTHING for the next time around).

#1i do not have an advanced PS edition (can only convert to B&W and adjust contrast and brightness), so in the first, how annoying is the lamp post? do i REALLY need to take out the lamp (when ever it is that i get a real PS)?

#2are the eyes too overdone? too cliche? how does the tear stike you?

#3 is it a major problem that her right arm isnt in the pic?

#4is the background too distracting?
(ive got thick skin)

aussiemummy · Sep 29, 2005

i think number 2 is really nice. the tear adds emotion to what would have been just a picture of some eyes.

number 3 is my favourite. i don't mind about the arm

the thing behind the head in number 1 is a bit annoying. i could PS that out for you if you like?

and the only thing that annoys me about number 4 is that blurryness, but that may just have to do with the size of the image.

overall i think you have sone really well for a point and shoot

FuryofNature · Sep 29, 2005

I like number 3 the best also. The cropped arm doesn't bother me either. She looks like shes having a lot of fun. Its such a simple part of childhood but its so much fun. Well done.

_KA

aussiemummy · Sep 29, 2005

i took the lamp thingy out and lightened it up a bit for ya.. hope you don't ind. if you do then i'll just delete it.

tat2me2 · Sep 29, 2005

aussiemummy said:
i think number 2 is really nice. the tear adds emotion to what would have been just a picture of some eyes.

number 3 is my favourite. i don't mind about the arm

the thing behind the head in number 1 is a bit annoying. i could PS that out for you if you like?

and the only thing that annoys me about number 4 is that blurryness, but that may just have to do with the size of the image.

overall i think you have sone really well for a point and shoot

ahhh, yeah, if you could do it that'd be great. its gonna get blown up for the mother of this boy...to go next to a photo of his brother that i took (and i want it to look as nice as possible for them). can you grab it from here? or do i need to send you the file?

#4, the blurriness...its the sun...im guessing. everyt ime its very brightoutside, that happens to my photos. all the ones from that day are like that (i shot like 6-7 different kids while outside of a resteraunt, all family members, while they were playing and it was so freakin bright out).

thanks for the comments so far.

tat2me2 · Sep 29, 2005

wow. that was quick...thanks. that looks great!

LaFoto · Sep 30, 2005

Good work on the boy's portrait.
Now a little crop, less sky above his head (the smaller tree behind him will always show that you photographed from a position lower than his!) and no more black spots to his bottom left (right where the "J", the dot, the "e" and the first "s" of your watermark are) and you have a keeper with this clarity and sharpness. I even light the light distribution of the on-camera flash in this one, and I rarely do so otherwise.

"The tear" is very nice, too, a "go-beyond-the-border"-portrait... maybe you would want to try a crop that also leaves out the ear and the beginning of the lip? Just for test reasons? To see if the eyes and the tear come out even more? I don't mean to crop the lefthand side so that you lose the shadow part on that side of his face, just the light spot given by his ear...

The water droplets are best.

And I have seen the laughting girl with the lollipop before and have always thought what a cheerful, natural, lively, spontaneous child photo this is. But it has a bit too many "snapshot-qualities" to be a real "child portrait", I think. It is a very endearing photo, all the same!!!!

tat2me2 · Sep 30, 2005

"I even light the light distribution of the on-camera flash in this one, and I rarely do so otherwise"

im confussed...ive gotten a comment like this somewhere else about the lighting (theres another pic from this same location, but the boys faced a different direction in relation to the sun (or light...haha...cloudy day).
the other person thought there was artificial lighting....there was none.
i was outside, and there were no trees around us, so i completely turned off the flash (as always)...its all natural lighting (my favorite)...

is that what you were talking about? does it look like i used flash here? (wierd, cuz i didnt, and ive heard that before)....it was however a wierd day outside with the brightness and the clouds....

thanks for your comments

LaFoto · Sep 30, 2005

Sorry. Wrong spelling... meant to say "I even like the light distribution..." etc.
And now you are telling me you did not use the flash?
Where do the two light spots in the boy's eyes come from then?

tat2me2 · Sep 30, 2005

LaFoto said:
Sorry. Wrong spelling... meant to say "I even like the light distribution..." etc.
And now you are telling me you did not use the flash?
Where do the two light spots in the boy's eyes come from then?

thats what im telling you. promise. i turn off the flash when outside. i guess it was just the light? seems like its difficult to beleive i guess...but its true.