Baby portrait, do the catchlights detract? *edited version attached*

  • Thread starter Deleted member 21335
  • Start date
i prefere the first one, leave the catchlights they are a bit big but better that than none at all, stunning pic, well done
 
Hi Gareth,
First of all brilliant shot, great expression and lighting.

The catch-light is too dominant but to remove it completely makes the eyes and the image look “dead”.
There is an advert on the telly at the moment where the catch-light is strip light that cuts right across the girls eyes and I find it totally distracting.

I have applied a 20px fuzzy white spot to your edit as an idea...
gazmorton_edit2.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think as well the original shot is excellent, well done
 
As everyone else says, you need the catchlights. They are big but not overpowering and you could always reduce them in PS if you really felt the need. Personally I think they look fine. And as I am just about to go and shoot a two year old I would be happy to get a shot as nice as this today!
 
I would keep the catchlights also, I have done edits like these previously and clients prefer having them in the the image, it just adds to the eyes. A lovely capture.
 
Definitely like the original catchlights... but, being anal, I prefer not to see the shape of the octo. I modify my round softboxes with wide velcro to smooth the sharp corners to it's not so obvious, I guess you could shove the pixels around in post if you like though! Square (window shaped!) softboxes can give very natural looking catchlights in images like this too.
 
The catchlight definitely do not distract. Original one is the best one.
In my opinioon BIG catchlights always look beter especialy in baby eyes.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the comments folks. Sorry for the delay in replying, been in Vegas! I personally prefer the original too.

For the person who asked, it was shot with the 85mm F1.4G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top