Sweet dreams are made of these...
- Thread Starter mc1979
- Start date
gsgary
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 16,143
- Reaction score
- 3,004
- Location
- Chesterfield UK
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
The histogram is way over to the right in original, not a great start for B+W
Last edited:
Derrel
Mr. Rain Cloud
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2009
- Messages
- 48,211
- Reaction score
- 18,936
- Location
- USA
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Q: Does the horizontal orientation totally ruin the photo?
A: NO, it does not. But it came at the expense of showing the sleeping baby in his/her full body length. Instead of showing the entire baby, a lot of the compositional space was alloted to the wrinkled bed. The composition of the original photo was very weak. The space was utilized poorly. THE BABY on the other hand, is adorable, and the positioning of the head and hands is very agreeable, and the bed and the light spreading across the surface of the bed is simply lovely, lovely light. Not sure if you are the parent, or a disinterested photographer. I am a dispassionate observer. I'd like to have seen the baby, full-length, asleep on a nicely lighted bed surface with natural light sweeping across the scene...but the landscape camera orientation does not show that...it crops the baby's body, which creates "tension" in a scene that is supposed to be rendered in an ethereal, peaceful, pastoral manner. That is why the composition, which is the "effective utilization of space", is weak. The subject matter is strong. The lighting is strong. The baby's body orientation does not work with the camera held horizontally. Peaceful, pastoral "landscape" scenes and other scenes conveying a sense of restfulness are traditionally framed horizontally, BUT that simply does not come together with the baby cut in half, and so much space devoted to the bedclothes.
A: NO, it does not. But it came at the expense of showing the sleeping baby in his/her full body length. Instead of showing the entire baby, a lot of the compositional space was alloted to the wrinkled bed. The composition of the original photo was very weak. The space was utilized poorly. THE BABY on the other hand, is adorable, and the positioning of the head and hands is very agreeable, and the bed and the light spreading across the surface of the bed is simply lovely, lovely light. Not sure if you are the parent, or a disinterested photographer. I am a dispassionate observer. I'd like to have seen the baby, full-length, asleep on a nicely lighted bed surface with natural light sweeping across the scene...but the landscape camera orientation does not show that...it crops the baby's body, which creates "tension" in a scene that is supposed to be rendered in an ethereal, peaceful, pastoral manner. That is why the composition, which is the "effective utilization of space", is weak. The subject matter is strong. The lighting is strong. The baby's body orientation does not work with the camera held horizontally. Peaceful, pastoral "landscape" scenes and other scenes conveying a sense of restfulness are traditionally framed horizontally, BUT that simply does not come together with the baby cut in half, and so much space devoted to the bedclothes.
mc1979
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 52
- Location
- Al
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
- Thread Starter 🔹
- #19
I get what you are saying Derrel...and no, baby is not mine. I'm just trying to get better! I am glad that it seems I got the BABY right, because that's one thing I was worried about, his skin and all. I will be cropping this in portrait and will post more up later on!
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account on our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
