Up close critique please...

[AMPhoto]

I'm new to the forum and its very helpful to get insight from other folks out there. Please respond with critiques and criticism so that I can learn from the experience. This one was shot at TV 1/800, AV 1.8, ISO 100. Do you agree with those settings? Thanks so much to all!

 

[Andrew Sun]

first of all, she's much to adorable and is making it hard to critique =)
i think your settings are good - you can see that from the shot, however you could use some pp work in enhancing the contrast and give it some more color depth

the watermark could also be placed in a better spot (smaller in the bottom left)

other than that, lovely

 

[SpeedTrap]

Very Cute!
1) it looks like you missed your focus by just a bit. The eyes are not as sharp as they could be.
2) In a photograph people are drawn to the brightest point and unfortunatly that is the bottom right corner and the soother, I would advise to move into full shade and try this shot again.

 

[AMPhoto]

Thanks everyone for the comments and critique. I definitely agree that this could be better...not WOW. Maybe if I cropped the portion off that was blown out on the right it might be better...I'm gonna see what else I could do to make this better in photoshop. Having trouble with contrast and all...

 

[AMPhoto]

Andrew and Speedtrap...I've revised the photo taking your critiques into considerations and making adjustments for contrast and cropping the photograph to remove a portion of the blown out white. I'm thinking the crop is better because it removes the unwanted portion to the right, but I'm thinking I'm seeing too much red in the skin / hair. Tried to remove but don't know if I did a good job or not. Your thoughts?

 

[Torus34]

The flesh-colored 'thing' in the lower left portion of the picture [chair rail?] and the copyright message at the bottom [Have you really copyrighted this image? 'Fess up, now!] spoil an otherwise charming print.

 

[Blank]

If you cool your white balance and use an unsharp mask, the image looks better, imo (i used bridge and opened in RAW). I did an edit but I didnt want the shot on my flickr. I understand why (I have young kids as well), but for me, the pacifier ruins a very nice portrait.

As for the copyright, as soon as you capture the image on a digital storage devive (CF card), you own copyright.

 

[GTHill]

The worst thing about this pic to me is the binky or whatever it is called. My little girl needed hers longer than she should have, but if possible it would be nice to not have it in the pics.

GT

 

[AMPhoto]

OK...so if everyone can overlook the pacifier...I was experimenting with my own daughter and trying to get my exposure, aperture, ISO and shutter speed correct. Really trying to use this image as a test to get my settings right

Blank - is this any better after I used your suggestions on white balance and sharpening?

Thanks for everyones help!!!