Portrait of A Little One C+C

[Ballistics]

 

[DarkShadow]

Ok I am a rookie so for what its worth what I think.I think the portrait is very good despite a very very brite back ground.It looks a little soft on the right side or his left side from his ear down to his shirt color and shoulder.I am also not a fan of the top part of the head being cropped off.I like that he is off center in somewhat of a side stance.BTW Handsome young man.

Your still better photographer then me so I am really no one to judge.cheers.

 

[The_Traveler]

There seems to be all sorts of artifactual thingies in the background that look as if the overbright background was fiddled with.
His left ear seems melted a bit and his eyes have that 'children if the damned' kind of intensity.

There's too much going on her for it to sink in well for me.

Sorry.

 

[Derrel]

I find the ultra shallow DOF kind of disconcerting. The forehead is so,so OOF that "it", the OOF forehead, becomes a significant part of the photo, and not in a really favorable way to my line of thought. The child's eyes are rendered pretty sharply, then the ears are in the rear defocused zone...I dunno...even the eyebrows are OOF...just not coming together for me as a portrait. I've often found this type of ultra shallow DOF more of a technical exercise than a pictorial or illustrative technique. Of course, some people will be fascinated by this look; it DOES create what I often call a visual "impression"...this is a decidedly affected type of shot...it's clear that a choice has been made by the photog, and so on that level it's...well.... it is what it is. The use of this ultra-shallow DOF style on a portrait might be similar to the way a vocalist sings a specific song--there is more than just one way to sing, oh, say, The Star Spangled banner, for instance...straightforward and traditional, gospel-style, blues style, Christina Aguilera style (with the lyrics totally eff'ed up), or even Roseanne Barr style.

 

[DarkShadow]

LOL children of the damned.Traveler You make a good teacher,firm and critical but when said and done,the students will come out of the class on top.

 

[Ballistics]

Ok I am a rookie so for what its worth what I think.I think the portrait is very good despite a very very brite back ground.It looks a little soft on the right side or his left side from his ear down to his shirt color and shoulder.I am also not a fan of the top part of the head being cropped off.I like that he is off center in somewhat of a side stance.BTW Handsome your man.

Your still better photographer then me so I am really no one to judge.cheers.

Thanks for the input. Cropping into the head allows you to focus in on the face. There's more to a portrait then portrait orientation and the entire head in the frame.

Check out Jeffrey Mosier, pretty popular portrait photographer that has a series of horizontal portraits. As for the background, sometimes you just gotta let those highlights blow

Your still better photographer then me so I am really no one to judge.cheers.

New or not, critiquing is a great way to learn. I'm always willing to establish a dialogue about my photos no matter the experience level of who I'm speaking to. I'm
not afraid to learn from a "rookie" although I would consider myself to be a rookie as well. Never be afraid to question the photographer's photo.

 

[DarkShadow]

I understand what your saying,I just dont like it when the head is cropped off not matter how great the photographer is.Just curious what was in the background and why was is so white and brite.

 

[Ballistics]

There seems to be all sorts of artifactual thingies in the background that look as if the overbright background was fiddled with.
His left ear seems melted a bit and his eyes have that 'children if the damned' kind of intensity.

There's too much going on her for it to sink in well for me.

Sorry.

The only thing I edited was the sharpness. I didn't touch anything else.



Artifacts edited out.

 

[Ballistics]

I understand what your saying,I just dont like it when the head is cropped off not matter how great the photographer is.

Personal tastes aren't really relevant in a C+C.

 

[The_Traveler]

The only thing I edited was the sharpness. I didn't touch anything else.

I go along with Derrel's much more complete response. All of the OOF stuff, instead of fading into the background and letting me as the viewer concentrate on what I 'should' be looking at, really becomes a center of interest. The asymmetric ears really jar because generally ears are mirror images and that they aren't is disconcerting. The blob of OOF hair on the forehead also pulls my eye. What happens for me is that all these things become a discontinuous set of uncomfortable items and don't really contribute to the image of an adolescent boy.

 

[DarkShadow]

The artifacts gone looks way better like a white back drop.

 

[Ballistics]

Ok then. Thanks for the input guys.

 

[texkam]

Too much post for my taste.

 

[Ballistics]

Too much post for my taste.

See post #9

 

[kundalini]

I understand what your saying,I just dont like it when the head is cropped off not matter how great the photographer is.

Personal tastes aren't really relevant in a C+C.

Personal taste is usually what you will recieve from asking for C&C. So in that sense, it is relevant. The eye of the beholder sort of thing. Some are formed around the foundations and some are what affects the viewer. You can't discount one without discounting the other. They are all valid to some degree. Just because you deem their view repugnant, doesn't invalidate their option to voice why something is amiss in the photo for them.

I don't have an issue with cropping the top of the subjects head, but listening with both ears from the feedback is why you've asked for C&C.