My first photo shoot

[Jon_Are]

I think the problems with the photos have been addressed; what I find more interesting is the rude/not rude discussion.

Upon first reading jcolman's post, my initial reaction that it was, indeed, unnecessarily harsh.

But then I looked at it again, along with his explanation:

My intent was not to be rude to the OP. I simply gave a point by point checklist of areas that need work.

Since I am not a mind reader, I'll take him at his word that his intent was not to be rude. And who can argue with the second sentence (which is, in fact, what would most benefit the OP)?

As for this remark:

...criticism should only come when some kind of encouragement is also delivered.

I might agree if we were discussing an interaction with a child (or even an adult, perhaps, in a formal educational setting). But on the internet? In this context? C'mon.

Anyway, maverickphoto seems to have a head on his shoulders and his feet on the ground. He wants to learn, and he's willing to listen to direction on how he can improve. No need to baby him.

Keep shootin', maverick. And keep posting.

Jon

 

[elemental]

Wow. What a warm reception.

I agree that these shots have plenty of room for improvement (and in all fairness, every area jcolman mentioned could use attention to elevate these to the next level), and I think the second is a little weak in the blacks.

This was five seconds of levels, and I think it looks a lot better. If you were to really do this, you'd probably want to dodge the top of the baby's head in a little. Besides that, I think experimenting with off-camera flash and being mindful of your focus (eyes!) are the next things to work on.

Oh, wait- did I forget to argue about manners? Oh well. Sorry for making off-topic suggestions- return to your banter.

 

[Jon_Are]

Oh, wait- did I forget to argue about manners?

Elemental's edit is quite an improvement. Suggestions I have not seen mentioned:

Watch out for chopped-off heads and arms. Just a slightly-less zoom (or more open crop) would have been better.

I would have preferred to see more of Dad's face.

This shot may have worked better in portrait orientation.

There, ya got THREE MORE things to learn! :mrgreen:

By the way, the strength of the dad photo is how well the subjects are connecting with one another. Very nice.

Jon

 

[youbetcha1018]

Awww, so cute! Congrats to you. But one I've noticed, why so dark? I mean couples wearing black and the background is black?

 

[Kalikala]

I see what you guys are saying about the black on black. But for some reason it works for me with the first image. The darkness pulls my eyes right to their faces. It’s like there’s no distraction, a mother and child moment.

This is what I was thinking as well. I didn't like it so much on the second, but the first I thought it worked well. However, I would cut out the part of her arm showing at the bottom of her sleeve, then it's more of a "dissolving into the background" then black on black.

 

[manaheim]

On the photos:

- On the first one, I might also brighten it up and adjust the contrast. It's just a bit dim. I've noticed from some recent experience that people (myself included) tend to not make the B&W shots contrasty enough. You'd be amazed how far you can push it, and it looks good when you do it enough (without blowing the highlights of course).
- On the second one, I'm wanting to move the frame up and to the right a bit... leave space above Dad's head. Would be a neat angle. I actually don't think that would have EXACTLY worked from that angle as it would have cut baby up a bit, but perhaps if you got down lower or from another angle you could have done it. Basically, don't be afraid to leave some open space on the sides of the picture there- sometimes it looks really cool.
- I agree with all jcolman's comments, so +1 there.

On the perceived rudeness... some people on this forum tend to come across a bit rough, but it's mainly that they're just being "to the point". I don't think I have seen more than maybe 1 person that was actually a jerk. I wouldn't take it too seriously. Honestly, I like the more direct approach. It stings a bit sometimes... but it doesn't pad the truth either.

 

[Bifurcator]

This is the "beyond the basics" forum and as such, the shooters skill level should be advanced beyond the basics. The shots are not much better than snapshots. Sorry to be honest. But since you basically said the same things I commented on we'll just let it go at that.

Yup, HOW you say things makes a big difference. Good of you to notice that! :thumbup:

Just to be clear. My intent was not to be rude to the OP. I simply gave a point by point checklist of areas that need work. Nothing more, nothing less.

I think it was the "What you need to learn" lead-ins to each sentence that did it. The same sentences without that part would have come across differently. Remember, this is text so we have no clue as to whether you're smiling, acting kindly, or outraged.

BTW, I agree with your general critique of the images - although dark on dark can work sometimes.

 

[Yemme]

This is what I was thinking as well. I didn't like it so much on the second, but the first I thought it worked well. However, I would cut out the part of her arm showing at the bottom of her sleeve, then it's more of a "dissolving into the background" then black on black.

I agree. It's a decent image for black on black.