Critique Going on the wall picture added

B

BMG

Messages
399
Edit My Images
No
IMG_0901.JPG Evening all,

I haven't posed on here in ages. New job and just haven't stopped. Anyway, my wife and I wanted a portrait of our lad to go with two prints of our daughters and despite several attempts to get hold of the photographer that took the other two, we couldn't. So I've decided to have a go myself. This style is not something I'm comfortable with, takes a lot of time to get my settings right as I don't understand it particularly well. So this was the shot that is going on the wall. The hardest thing about it was trying to copy someone's else's style, without fully understanding how they achieved it in the 1st place.
 
what a lovely natural shot- on my screen it looks a little soft focus wise

Les ;)
 
Honestly I think it looks a little soft and flat if I'm honest. Lovely expression though. I'm just not sure how it will print.
 
Last edited:
a nice natural portrait which does look a little soft but maybe mainly due to a narrow depth of field as the eyes look quite sharp

Stan
 
Evening all , thank you for taking the time to look.

Lez325 said:
what a lovely natural shot- on my screen it looks a little soft focus wise

Les ;)
Click to expand...
Cheers, thank you for the message and can see the difference. Only used a high pass filter around the eyes. Think it was taken at f3.5 if memory serves, others were taken at f8 & my wife complained they were too sharp and wanted them a little "fuzzier, like the others".
gramps said:
:plus1:
Click to expand...
Cheers for the vote of confidence

Mark Johnson said:
I think you have saved a fortune, and produced a super shot.

Very well taken
Click to expand...
Cheers, there in lies the next problem, I need to find a subtitle printer and framer, again to match what she did originally.
UaeExile said:
Honestly I think it looks a little soft and flat if I'm honest. Lovely expression though. I'm just not sure how it will print.
Click to expand...
I've had this crit before and it is well received. I need to read up more about lighting, everything else I've learnt, I've got from books & doing. No different here.

stanm said:
a nice natural portrait which does look a little soft but maybe mainly due to a narrow depth of field as the eyes look quite sharp

Stan
Click to expand...
Cheers for the feedback.
 
BMG said:
Evening all , thank you for taking the time to look.


Cheers, thank you for the message and can see the difference. Only used a high pass filter around the eyes. Think it was taken at f3.5 if memory serves, others were taken at f8 & my wife complained they were too sharp and wanted them a little "fuzzier, like the others".

Cheers for the vote of confidence


Cheers, there in lies the next problem, I need to find a subtitle printer and framer, again to match what she did originally.

I've had this crit before and it is well received. I need to read up more about lighting, everything else I've learnt, I've got from books & doing. No different here.


Cheers for the feedback.
Click to expand...

You could always start off with another light between your subject and the background pointed at the back of his head from an angle. Something to make him stand off the dark background.
 
You've created & caught an absolutely charming moment :)

The light is a bit flat for me, I'm not sure you needed the second one.
And it's my personal preference but I don't think dark backgrounds suit happy expressions with very young children.

hth
 
Evening all, sorry for not replying sooner, work has been manic. To help with what I have been trying to achieve I thought I would post the images I have been trying to copy, this no taken on my ipad, sorry for the rubbish quality.

image.jpg
 
juggler said:
You've created & caught an absolutely charming moment :)

The light is a bit flat for me, I'm not sure you needed the second one.
And it's my personal preference but I don't think dark backgrounds suit happy expressions with very young children.

hth
Click to expand...
Hi Simon, thanks for the feedback. I was trying to create the double catch lights, however I don't thing I can create enough distance to power one light up enough to counter the other light without blowing the highlights. I suppose I could use one light with a reflector to create the catchlight?
 
BMG said:
Hi Simon, thanks for the feedback. I was trying to create the double catch lights, however I don't thing I can create enough distance to power one light up enough to counter the other light without blowing the highlights. I suppose I could use one light with a reflector to create the catchlight?
Click to expand...

Well, you've done a good job of producing what you were aiming for, though in the samples it looks as though one light is about twice the power of the other and that's given those a bit more dimensionality.

I've posted so often on the subject of two lights, one either side of the subject, that I was moved to write a short article:

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/1-2-3-lights-for-portraits.647201/
 
juggler said:
Well, you've done a good job of producing what you were aiming for, though in the samples it looks as though one light is about twice the power of the other and that's given those a bit more dimensionality.

I've posted so often on the subject of two lights, one either side of the subject, that I was moved to write a short article:

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/1-2-3-lights-for-portraits.647201/
Click to expand...
Awesome, certainly gives a steer in the right direction, no pun intended. Phil V's quote "there is only 1 sun" makes tremendous sense. Separate to this thread, I think I've been guilty of, I have two soft boxes, so I'll use them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top