Please critique my little tyke photos...

Those are some adorable models you've got there! I think you did well on composition. Number 2 is my favorite! It's great in color, but I think it would be so sweet in b&w. However, these all look over exposed on my screen. You can pretty easily pull up a histogram and see if all your whites are indeed blown out. I would dial exposure down a stop or two, and add a little more contrast (i like high contrast pictures though, so thats a personal thing) On number three, there is a little blue thing in the upper left corner that is pulling my attention, that is an easy clone job if you have the software for it!
I have to admit my first thought was, "Wow, those highlights are very hot!" But then I considered that maybe it was a kind of stylistic choice to have it so surreallistically bright. Nonetheless, I have to agree with JustJazzie that the "pop" you are looking for could probably be attained by other means (contrast, adjusting blacks level, etc.).

Very nice depth of field/bokeh, composition is very nice as well. You filled the frame effectively and the focus is clear, save for the small blue speck, which I didn't notice actually.

The horizon in #2 is slightly wonky, but I don't think it hurts much.

I enjoyed these.
Cute photographs, but the picture looks a bit over-exposed or too much highlights.

Regarding the photos being overexposed...

I've printed my photos only a handful of times, so I have very little experience transitioning from the computer screen to prints. We printed some photos a few weeks ago and they all were very under-exposed, so I upped the exposure (in LR) even more on these than I thought would be needed. I guess I've over done it?

I once owned the Colormunki to calibrate my display but I honestly felt like it wasn't doing anything so I sold it. But is it possible for photos to look overexposed on everyone's computer screen but turn out perfect on prints?
How bright is your monitor? I keep mine about 50%. #2 is cute. I like 3 but something seems weird about his eyes. On my phone though.

The bright green outfit kills #1 imo
How bright is your monitor? I keep mine about 50%. #2 is cute. I like 3 but something seems weird about his eyes. On my phone though.

The bright green outfit kills #1 imo

I keep my monitor near 100% when working in a normally-lit room. Maybe that's my problem???

I never even thought about the green outfit until you mentioned it! Doh! This wasn't supposed to be a photo-shoot day... I just saw a few good moments. If it were a "photo-shoot day" my wife would probably have coordinated outfits better.

Regarding the eyes on #3... I'm sure it's because I edited them too much. Anyone else have an opinion on the eyes on #3? This shot SOOC was way underexposed and his eyes were nearly lifeless, so I brightened up the iris and sclera, and I added catchlights. I could easily just drop the opacity on all of that if it's too heavy.

Another possibility of why you might think the eyes on #3 look weird... does it sort of look like he is wearing mascara or eye liner all around his eyes? With him I seem to have that problem creep up when I do my "color pop" or tone curve... it darkens those areas around his eyes. I actually went into the layers on Photoshop and masked out (not sure if that's the right term there) around his eyes there so that the tone curve and "pop" wouldn't be applied to those areas. It looked a lot more like he was wearing mascara before I did that. In #2, it sort of looks like he has dark blue eye shadow on his left eye. Again, that was as issue that popped up after my global tone curve and color saturation. It makes the rest of the picture look great, but I have problems with his eyes, cheeks (they turn too red), and his lips (they turn too pink - like he's wearing lipstick). I try to remove all of that and get it back to what it looks like naturally, but I haven't quite figured it out.

My boy doesn't want to grow up thinking his dad put makeup on him as a baby. :lol:
Last edited:
Cute models. indeed!

I agree with Paige on the reduced brightness. When I took the digital class, we made a test print , then dialed down the monitor to match the "brightness" of print. IIRC, it was about 50%.
The brightness doesn't bother me so much as the super saturated greens. Maybe because there is so much green in the photo, it kind of takes over when it's that saturated. Play with what ever tool you use for the color pop and bring the green back a bit.

A few things in the BG could easily be cloned out (building in first, entire horizon line in second and blue spot in third). That's only if you want to be super nit picky.

These are still incredibly cute photos. You captured three very real moments.
It does look overexposed with blown highlights. I am not impressed by the composition, to be honest. The first photo is not balanced with the weight shifted to the left. I would have much preferred the empty space on the left, behind the smaller child and the older one positioned at roughly 1/3 on the right. That would give the photo a better balance. The second one is better, but the trees are distracting and it looks tilted. Always look at the background behind your subject head. Ideally the horizon line should be lower or higher, And never at the neck level. I have some problems with the aperture selection here. Did you try to isolate the subject or did you want to show the field of grass? It looks to me that you have chosen the "who cares" aperture. I usually find it difficult to isolate a kid in the grass, because I do not like an out of focus foreground and the OoF grass on the foreground for me is a no no. It looks like bright shiny afternoon which is not the best time of day for a photo session. The light is quite unforgiving. One positive - you can use much smaller aperture. So I would rather use a smaller aperture for a deep DoF , tried to keep the edges of the field out of the pic and tried not to cut the limbs especially at joints. Limbs cut at joints look rather bad. Eye contact is important as well with No 3 kind of compositions. It would be so much nicer if the boy was looking at you. That would give it a completely different feel.
Last edited:
use your histrogram to judge and different monitors/calibrations won't matter

There is a difference between "high key" "artistic style" or whatever ya wanna call it vs. blown highlight. When they are blown, there is no data in them. Does not always have to be in the whites, you can blow colors too. It is a fine line doing high key without blowing the highlights...just keep at it.

if these were shot in raw, easily adjusted and fixable, they are nice shots.
and yes there is some over saturation in the greens....comes down to taste anymore on that, and noise in the back...I just hate noise with a it's just a "me" thing really.
not a fan of horizonal portraits unless there is a reason. I don't see a reason in shot 1, cropped to 8x10. edited out background, adjusted the hot spots, removed noise. put darker/contrast like I like, and one with a brighter lighter feel that others like.

just a quick thing so yeah it's not perfect, but illustrates a few key points. There is some artifacting that would need removing/editing/smudging from the processing, but when viewed full size, it's not terrible to look at and would print well...the original would not print well.


#2 is quite strong. I like the repeated way the shape of the kid's head is echoed in the dandelions. There's good balance in the frame, nicely done.

Eyes look overcooked in #3.

#1 is out of balance. An almost-square crop would help, but you really need more room on the left side of the frame.

As noted, overexposed. Color palette's a little nuts, were these shot on VIVID or something? It's definitely a look, but I think it's a little overdone.
oh yeah, I took down the vibrance 20-30 points as well.

Most reactions