Would love some constructive criticism

[MrsKinsey]

Hello! I'm new here. I would love to get some constructive criticism on some photos I recently took of my daughter.

#1

#2

#3 - Looking Up

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

I shot these in Auto mode with my Kodak EasyShare 7.1 MP. It's the only camera I have to use right now. I am hoping to get a digital SLR (I'm considering a Nikon D5000).

Any kind of advice would be helpful.

Thank you!

MrsKinsey

 

[adversus]

First off, welcome to the forum!

Secondly, if you want some good feedback (C&C), limit your post to just 3 or 4 pictures at the most, and number them so it's easier for people to reference them. More pictures generally means less feedback.

As far as these go, looks like you are off to a good start! Getting down to eye level is good, the "looking up" pose is usually never very flattering (be it a baby or an adult).

You are limited as far as options go for exposure etc with that camera, but if you end up getting a DSLR I highly recommend picking up the book Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson, and The Photographers Eye by Michael Freeman.

 

[I X L R 8]

I think constructive criticism is opinionated by what the eye can see.
No two eyes see the same.
Digital, this goes further.

What you see on your monitor is not what everyone else see's.
Everyone on this forum has a different monitor, or monitor setting.
Not everyone has 20-20 vision.

Computer hardware.
Not everyone has a graphics card capable of rendering your images optimally, nor monitors that are rendered optimally.

They look nice to me.

 

[Eventer]

I think once you get a deconet camera you will be away You semm to have a good eye for photos, and in regards to the photo where the girls looking up. I kinda like them, gives the photo an "innocent" look
I quite like number 3 - just not the white thing sitting on her lap. bit of a distraction
Number 5 I like too - But again, would be heaps better with a DSLR where you can pick all your settings etc and shoot in manual

just my 2 cents worth

 

[fokker]

I think constructive criticism is opinionated by what the eye can see.
No two eyes see the same.
Digital, this goes further.

What you see on your monitor is not what everyone else see's.
Everyone on this forum has a different monitor, or monitor setting.
Not everyone has 20-20 vision.

Computer hardware.
Not everyone has a graphics card capable of rendering your images optimally, nor monitors that are rendered optimally.

They look nice to me.

Wrong again. As someone mentioned in another thread, your graphics card has absolutely nothing to do with how the image will look, it is all in the monitor and calibration. But that aside, constructive criticism is usually helpful for pointing out compositional flaws or missed focus (you know all about that one), as well as many many other things that you probably don't understand, since you seem more interested in electronics and telling people how they should act rather than the art of photography.

For example, to the OP:
#1 You cut off the hand, and it is generally considered best practice to shoot from eye level with children. Shooting down on children never gives an original looking image because most people are used to seeing children from above, but not at eye level. In this case it's not actually so bad because you appear to be quite a long way above the sitting child, to the point where it's almost a unique angle again in the opposite extreme.

#2 is cute, but it is very centered. If possible you should avoid centering the subject. Just one of those things. Also, generally the child should be looking at the camera.

#3 Similar comments as #2, though the angle is good on this one. The catchlights in her eyes look good. The uneven light across her face is not ideal though (bright highlights on the left, darker to the right)

#4 'Looking away' shots like this should always leave the subject looking into open space in the picture. Because she is centered she loses some of that space. If you moved the camera slightly left so she was right up against the right hand side and looking into a larger area of open space it would be better.

etc

 

[Morpheuss]

those are some really cute pictures my favorites are when shes smiling number one looks a little bright but i like it

 

[I X L R 8]

Believe me , if you're taking high quality photos and then viewing them on limited monitor with a limited Video card then you are certainly missing something.
Not that my photos are high quality.

Oh you mean this?

That makes no sense at all. PC's do not change focus based on how good they are how powerful they are if that was the case there would be a crap load of mixed results in Photography class and online. My Images are just as sharp on my PC as they are on a PC That's over 15 years old and running windows 95, so so much for that theory. Sony has a history for less than stellar focus I guess nobody but Sony has a good enough PC for them then. That's fine though, Sony can keep em.

This is obviously wrong. Though I don't recall ever stating that a better monitor or Graphics card would change focus on an image.
The graphics card renders colors, shading and whatnot.
A 4 mb ATI card from 1996 is not going to render an image as brightly OR AS ACCURATELY as a newer model " GPU " nor will an old CRT monitor compare with todays newer LCD, Plasma, or CRT's.
It just doesn't work that way.

Wrong again. As someone mentioned in another thread, your graphics card has absolutely nothing to do with how the image will look, it is all in the monitor and calibration. But that aside, constructive criticism is usually helpful for pointing out compositional flaws or missed focus (you know all about that one), as well as many many other things that you probably don't understand, since you seem more interested in electronics and telling people how they should act rather than the art of photography.

I simply stated that images look better/ different on different equipment, which I know for a fact is true. I have recently tested it, going from an older Graphics card and monitor, to a new LCD. The difference in viewing images from one to the other is nothing short of amazing.

Have you tried this? Or are you speaking on the subject only to be heard.

Also, the Idaho guy claims that Sony has a history of less than steller focus, pinning the blame on the Camera body. He mentions nothing of lenses.
Do lenses not have anything to do with focus or resolution?
Why was this conveniently left out/not mentioned?

I really am trying to understand this analogy.

 

[MHRISH]

Overall this is a very good set of photos. My only suggestion is to watch the backgrounds. In number one there is a toy behind the child's head that is very distracting. Also a few of these would have benefited from a little bit of fill light on the face. Otherwise, I really like what you have done.

 

[I X L R 8]

Also, the Idaho guy claims that Sony has a history of less than steller focus, pinning the blame on the Camera body. He mentions nothing of lenses.
Do lenses not have anything to do with focus or resolution?

The new guy has questions.
And where does the new guy go to obtain answers?

Is someone " afraid" to answer this??????????
Because it would be an admission that one day long ago ( today) in a place far far away, ( here) That he was wrong about something for the first time in his entire life? (more than once)
The townspeople danced in the streets with glee. A street was named after him. And a statue of him photographing a bird was erected in his honor to commemorate the ill fated occasion.
Being wrong, or less than informed is not easy these days, therefore, it should not go without the recognition it so richly deserves.

I know , because I've been here for a week already.
and I've been wrong about a few things. ( just about everything) BUT NOT THIS.
lol

 

[BuS_RiDeR]

I like #2 a lot. I think its a great shot and you captured her emotion very well...

I just did a quick edit of the shot and adjusted the levels a little... Your daughter is very cute.

 

[DanFinePhotography]

#7 is my favorite, the lighting composition etc... :thumbup:

 

[OrionsByte]

Is someone " afraid" to answer this??????????
Because it would be an admission that one day long ago ( today) in a place far far away, ( here) That he was wrong about something for the first time in his entire life? (more than once)

Maybe he's got better things to do than stare at TPF all day waiting to get in to a off-topic flame war?

To the OP, what a cute little girl! A couple of them look a touch soft to me, and a couple could also benefit from some white balancing, but overall they're great pictures and I'm sure you'll still be appreciating them many many years from now.

 

[MrsKinsey]

Thank you all for your comments! I appreciate you taking the time to write. Your comments have been very helpful.

Bus Rider, thank you for the edit on the picture!

Interesting discussion about the graphics cards and all that. Food for thought, but I have nothing of value to say about it.

MrsKinsey