Previous news story Next news story

Royal photographer shares tips on photographing babies, #royalbaby etc...

Jul 23, 2013 at 18:10:36 GMT

Print view

As Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge celebrate the birth of a baby son (you may not have heard about it), official Royal photographer for The Sun (that's the British tabloid newspaper, the baby doesn't have his own official photographer so far as we know) has shared some tips for photographing babies - both blue-blooded and the conventional common sort. Arthur Edwards knows what he's talking about, having photographed the proud father, William, when he was just an infant.

Prince William as a baby - photo: Arthur Edwards

Among his advice, Edwards recommends that you don't overlook little details, which might be significant later. He gives the example of Prince William's favorite toy - a blue elephant - which his mother Princess Diana would move out of the shot when pictures were taken. According to Edwards, 'She mentioned once that she later wished she'd had a photo to remember the toy, as it was his favorite'.

Arthur Edwards' top tips for photographing babies:

Think about the light you've got - babies don't like flash. If you're in the hospital room visiting mum just after the birth, see if she can move to the window and let the natural light do its job. Our first sight of Diana with baby William was outside of the hospital and the natural light helped the photos look beautiful
Think about the time of day you take your pictures. Always catch the baby after a feed and a sleep so they are content, happy and giggly, and not grumpy. Ask Mum before you visit when nap time is.
Some details may not seem the most attractive things to get into photos, but think about what you'll want to remember and what might become important ‘firsts'. Baby William became extremely fond of a blue elephant toy, but Diana would move it away from him for pictures. She mentioned once she later wished she'd had a photo to remember the toy, as it was his first favourite.
Lots of people will be taking pictures in the same locations, so think about using different backgrounds to help your photos stand out, like a coloured cushion underneath the baby.
If mum is usually the photographer in your family or social group, make sure you offer to take the camera for once - remember she'll want photos of her with her new arrival. Kate is the keenest photographer of the two, but even she will no doubt hand over the camera to William and trust him with the family album for a change.

Via: Amateur Photographer, Source: Nikon UK

OTHER NEWS

Comments

Total comments: 68

Shouldn't this have been written by Anne Geddes? /s

1 upvote

"pound royalbaby"?

1 upvote

sorry we don't have photo of baby George Washington

0 upvotes

The name of the baby is George Alexander Louis

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

3 upvotes

Oh, I thought he was a boy but he's turned out to be a GAL.

1 upvote

Photographing children and babies is somewhat important, this is where photography is still the best tool to keep memory, on the long-term, people deserve great pictures, they will stay for their whole life (and maybe more!)

1 upvote

Wow, isn't it amazing that here we have a comments section on a photography website about photography of babies and all we find is people moaning about the Royal Family.

No-one is asking you to photograph the Royal Baby but I would love hints on how to keep them in one place for more than a millisecond.

I struggle to catch my grandaughter in any photo at all as she is off at the merest sight of a camera and she has only turned three.
Even tied down in a high chair, all I managed was a huge sticky hand threatening to grab my lens..................

4 upvotes

I've had the opposite problem, my cousin's kiddo will pose for any photo from the age of 2 onward (now 5), and kids don't exactly pose naturally (granted, it's incredibly cute at times), hard to catch her in a natural way doing her thing.

1 upvote

You misunderstand. Most people in the UK aren't moaning about the royals themselves - only a small minority take any interest. What's really objectionable is the blanket media coverage and the fact that the boring story pops up everywhere, as in this ridiculous DPR article.

1 upvote

I agree with you. Even if my samsung nx300 has a blazing fast AF thanks to the hybrid af module, I have really hard times taking pictures of my 14 months old daughter. She uses to run towards me when I get down to shoot her, so my optimal setup is very fast shutter, fast lens, possibly low iso and I stay far from her so to be able to shoot when he gets neared.

0 upvotes

Francis,

Child photography (or indeed any photography) is about anticipation as opposed to "catching". Use and hone your "hunter" reflexes, study the terrain, study the pattern of what happens, and you will be in the right place and ready at the right moment - because you knew ahead of time that it will come.

Regards,

0 upvotes

Maybe get a Google glass? The smallish sensor means a huge DOF and the kid will soon get used to daddy having the glass on. But - of course - that giant sticky hand can grab the glass fast and make it non functional in no time.

0 upvotes

Where are the good photos - I am assuming the featured photo was the best photograph, which looks like a snapshot to me from the kodak instant camera.

Nice tips for snapshots. Yawn......

5 upvotes

Gentle advices. Regardless of royalty, it's good news, nice and happy couple, wish them luck

0 upvotes

No more babies please....royal or with lots of power, that stuff is good for tabloids. Anyway what am I suppose to think about the nation that goes wild because of one "royal baby..."

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

What's your problem with it? We're enjoying ourselves. Are you having a good time?

4 upvotes

Which Nation? The US is going just as crazy and they got rid of the Royal Family!!! Hypocrites

0 upvotes

Over here, we have our own royalty and unlike the British, ours have lots of power. (Which they use wisely, in case NSA is reading this).

3 upvotes

You can't call them Royalty as you live in a federal republic!!!

1 upvote

Believe it or not a large majority of the British people (including myself) support the Royal Family. Queen Liz does a fantastic job and ok there are some hanger- ons but aren't there in any country? Berlusconi and Hollande anyone?

You people who don't like the Royal Family should just go back to the good old USA or Australia or Russia or wherever (North Korea?) and enjoy yourselves with your perfect lives free of any tyranny. Leave us true Brits alone!

1 upvote

nothing to be proud of...
mass brainwashing makes it look normal to think that you support some other family who has no knowledge and regard for your family.

The Royal family is no better than my neighbours family in my eyes and I am proud to say that I don't support my neighbours family either - I only care about my own and even if I am in the minority I think I am more sane than the heard of sheep.

And as Essai mentioned if the royal family ir replaced with parasites - which I find to be very befitting than I can proudly say that by paying taxes I support people on welfare - nothing wrong with that either.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

OK then so i shouldn't pay any tax at all? Because if i had a choice, I would prefer to pay it to our Queen than to you. You only care about yourself and your own family, which is a sad indictment of where our country has gone in recent years. The Queen dedicated her life to this country and no one can say she hasn't lived up to that promise made 60 years ago. What have you done for your country then, enlighten me?

1 upvote

Please, please name him Gary.

0 upvotes

Gavin so he can find his Stacey

0 upvotes

If not Gary how about Stu or Sulley? ;)

0 upvotes

Steggie ...

1 upvote

"Barack Hussein Windsor" has a nice ring to it.

3 upvotes

I'm happy for the British; you will need to work a little harder to support another royal.

0 upvotes

The Monarchy is pretty much self funding and is a big attraction, hence why so many Americans go crazy over them. I support the Monarchy but their little more than a traveling circus.

4 upvotes

I don't think so. We don't need these families. The ancestors are no different from anyone else.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

3 upvotes

Awe, how cute. John Lydon would love this.

1 upvote

welcome to the digital world prince. within a year or two you will be the most documented and digitized prince in the entire history of the world.
you will have an enormous digital footprint to get "oh no not again" groans from most folks for the rest of their lives.

2 upvotes

replace prince with parasite

2 upvotes

Republic anyone?

2 upvotes

KEEP THE MONARCHY, LONG LIVE THE QUEEN

4 upvotes

Sure, republic is awesome, this is why we moved to live here in a monarchy... /irony
Last time when my country was worth something on the political and economical map of Europe was the other half of a Habsburg-ruled monarchy with Austria.

1 upvote

Off with their heads!

0 upvotes

Hope this little lad is not camera shy

2 upvotes

I bet the prince is going to be named Pentax.

5 upvotes

a good choice LOL

0 upvotes

Not just the toy blue elephant...taking photos for the family album, I make sure I fill the background with familiar clutter, all nicely in focus. That provides the details which stand out in memory and provide context for the shot in future years.

4 upvotes

Don't worry this child will become one of the most photographed people on the planet (if not already near the top), there will be plenty of more stories about him in the years to come.

0 upvotes

this baby is super important, as are royals.
who cares about syria or egypt or iraq?

5 upvotes

Their warlords, oil caesars and their lovely friends if they have a little time between bedding with Eastern European houris and buying gold covered Bentleys and Ferraris.

1 upvote

Gabor obviously is planning a speedy exit from London about now........

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

If you asked me I was pointing at people - including their Royal Families and the Arab League - who should but ironically don't care about Syria, Egypt or Iraq.

0 upvotes

Why would I? Because I am from a country which gave the majority of these wannabe models (DJs, reality show and cover girls and escorts) who made their luck in Dubai or Abu Dhabi? :)
Because I know some of them who spend more money in Harrods than the annual income of Albania?

0 upvotes

This baby is NOT super important. The aristocracy is a symbol of working class suppression and has no place in a modern society. It is an antiquated relic of times past (just like the Church). It is obscene to see poor people fawning all over the rich and privileged. The aristocracy must go.

2 upvotes

The Royal Family stopped shopping in Harrods about 13 years ago, so if you've seen them in there its most likely a look a like or you just don't know what your talking about....

0 upvotes

Matti, I am talking about arab royals, please tell me they stopped spending money in Harrods, Selfridges or Liberty.
Please :)))))

0 upvotes

Wye, you should look up what Royal Family means for UK tourism before say anything...

1 upvote

Ah ok i see now my mistake me bad sorry Gabor, Sorry to say they still let them into this country so they can shop in Harrods :(

0 upvotes

Anyway, most of these stores are in their hands: actually these are their playgrounds the the car salons at Park Lane :)

Comment edited 60 seconds after posting

1 upvote

I suggest Wye goes to North Korea, where he'll be truly happy!

1 upvote

without the working class who would clean ones stable and polish ones Carl Zeiss?

1 upvote

I think the pictures captured by The Onion of the royal offspring are quite well lit.

6 upvotes

Now, that's just plain creepy.

0 upvotes

http://www.theonion.com/articles/royal-baby-has-fathers-eyes,33216/

0 upvotes

Please, not here too. Enough with the royal baby silliness. Who cares?

8 upvotes

I'm British, I'm actually legally required to publish this or technically it's treason.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting

16 upvotes

I thought so!

0 upvotes

@Barney Britton, that's a lot of crap. You are leaving abroad, so it is treason anyway...

More seriously, the Royal family will never accomplish anything substantial in their lifetime, so why bother spending time and focusing on people who are irrelevant of this planet, it is just plain silly.

I wish humans would be a bit more concerned with things that are of paramount importance, maybe it shows how people are simply satisfied with mediocrity.

A weird concept...

3 upvotes

We're allowed to live abroad as long as we promise not to enjoy it.

10 upvotes

off with their heads!

1 upvote

moimoi, people are dumb. Of all the people in the world a large majority are poorly educated, critical thought was never a high priority, or they are simply incapable of thought beyond the most simple concepts. If that's not bad enough, even if someone is smart that doesn't necessarily mean they have much sense nor does it mean they care about anything other than themselves. In the states people drool over reality shows and celebrities. People are thoughtless, self-centered, and lack the ability to see the bigger picture.

2 upvotes

I'm with the French and the way the solved the aristocracy problem.

3 upvotes

@ Barney actually i thought it was ok as long as we promoted the English Language. help spread Cricket and tried to Educate the former Colonies on the benefits of rejoining the British Empire. Only if you fail is it Treason.

1 upvote

Barney is allowed to live wherever he wishes so long as the weather is no better than London's.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 68

Editorial content

Product database

Community


National Geographic's 125th anniversary celebrations continue Sep 30, 2013	NYT offers a look at 'hometown' across the U.S. through the eyes of teens Sep 24, 2013	Gorgeous color photos of America in the 1930's and 40's Aug 18, 2013	A Day in the Life of the KKK: Anthony Karen talks trust & photojournalism Aug 15, 2013

	Nikon 1 AW1 Sep 19, 2013
	Fujifilm X-A1 Sep 17, 2013
	Olympus OM-D E-M1 Sep 10, 2013
	Leica C (Typ112) Sep 8, 2013
	Nikon Coolpix P7800 Sep 5, 2013
	Nikon Coolpix S02 Sep 5, 2013
	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-QX10 Sep 4, 2013
	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-QX100 Sep 4, 2013
	Sony Alpha A3000 Aug 27, 2013
	Sony Alpha NEX-5T Aug 27, 2013

Okay Fuji, so now that the experiment is over....	107
D610 to be announced within 48 hours (as of 10/5)	87
How many shots do you take to get a shot?	83
While everyone ooohs and aaaahs over the ...	78
More leaks about K3 specifications	76
Anyone for Sunday Scapes (2013-10-06) ?	66
After 3 weeks & thousands of shots: NEX-6 + ...	57
E-M1 Trouble focusing on moving objects	55
The Sunday BIRD Volume 9, Issue 15 October 6, 2013	49
Counterfeit lens caps from Amazon	45
GX7: Extended ISO125 Image Degradation?	43
E-M1 as E-5 successor - first week experience	40
Help deciding between Sony NEX-6 or Olympus ...	36
X-pro1 vs x-a1 (or is it X-A1 vs X-pro1) using ...	33
I'm going broke buying E-M5 Eyecups!	32
Sensor Technology (The Software Engineer Way)	31
Shutter shock verdict is not present here. ...	30
Worth selling my Canon DSLR to move to Olympus ...	30
Five Worst Clichés About Photography	26
Why is new ff nex E mount instead of A mount?	26

Your email address:
Your name: