Teach me something - C&C please

f3nr15 wrote:

I COMPLETELY understand where you are coming from. Since my DSLR kick began in November, I haven't generally taken any photos of anything except for people, and mainly my kids! I do struggle to maintain an emotional connection to pictures of still life, scenery etc. However, I want to learn to be versatile in my ability, hence this photo.

This monument is around the corner from home, and kids are always playing around it. While I'm standing by it waiting for the monkeys to expend their energy, I invariable read the names of the fallen and cast a glance at the lonely figure atop it. So I guess I do have a connection of sorts to the object. In shooting it, I would have liked to capture the loneliness and constancy of that figure.

There will always be exceptions to my comments about what makes a photo memorable or what kinds are totally forgettable, because there will always be photos of things that are special to you individually that others may not 'get', especially without knowing the background of the subject. This statue is a place where your kids play nearby, it's dedicated to those who died in war, and I can see why you'd want to have some good shots of it.

With respect to the processing, I think the B+W adds a little drama to what would otherwise be an unremarkable picture (plan version below). And, once again, I've snuck the sepia in!

To be perfectly honest... I prefer the color version. The fact that there's a bit of blue between the clouds makes the sky more interesting, and being able to see the different colors of the monument itself also helps. It still doesn't have that 'hook' that really grabs me but it's better this way IMO and I do understand why it's got meaning for you.

Is there anyplace nearby from which you could possibly get a shot of this from a different, preferably upper angle? I'd like to see the front view of the figure, and most people probably never see it any differently than this lower view. Just a thought.

For King and Country - no processing

f3nr15 wrote:

Midwest wrote:

f3nr15 wrote:

A Little Wonder

Thank you, I appreciate the input.

To chat a little of my approach and philosophy - my purpose in this hobby is, like many, to capture the moment and the meaning. I'm very new to "the art", and in that respect most of my photos are going to be snapshots. I'm not at the point of staging pictures, and even feel uncomfortable giving people directions to allow composition, because I feel it takes away from the "reality" of the situation.

I'm glad you're putting thought into your pictures and I agree that 'staging' photos is not the look I generally go for either. Practically everything I shoot of my son comes about because I see the situation and realize there's a good photo to be had of it. My son lying on his back while my wife changes his diaper or whatever, I try to capture the moments I see and not to set them up. Being a real moment and not created is what gives it value to me.

Now having said that, I take very few photos, and despite their snapshot nature, I am trying hard to think and compose with each. In this instance, I have a small connection to the new baby, but a much more significant connection to my wife and daughter. The "moment" I was trying to capture was the unspoken lesson between my wife and my daughter taking place, which is the gentleness of holding a new baby - my wife has her arm protectively around the baby, with my daughter also practicing a tentative embrace. I wanted to the viewer to immediately focus on the newborn as the focal point, but then to recognise the "wonder" of the two holding him to be the story.

I think your approach is great! I often wonder why it is that so many people don't seem to ever try and capture a moment and just take a picture. I'm glad that is what you're trying do to. My comments on your photo here more directed towards the technical and the composition and not recognizing what you were trying to 'capture'.

So, I wanted the babe to be sharp and the bystanders to be a little softer, hence the f2.8 - I had a flash there anyway, and would have been able to use a larger DOF if I had wanted.

I chuckled about your comment re the tint - I'm a bit hung up on sepia at the moment because I'm enjoying the vintage look, but despite pleasing me, it probably annoys most. I'll cut back on the sepia in the future!

Please yourself! I'll be glad to tell you I'm not really keen on the sepia look but just as glad to say that you're ultimately the one you need to please. A hard drive full of photos that you aren't happy with isn't much good to you so by all means, if you like sepia, do sepia.

I got a few shots of my son yesterday eating breakfast and due to the white balance they rather had an almost sepia look to them so I processed the RAW images to get the natural color back into place. My personal favorite in post-processing (for the photos where it works) is tone-mapping, and some may not care for that either as much as I do. Not a problem!

Taking some of your pointers in to account, here's a less processed version of the photo with a tighter crop, centred on the babe a little more - do you think this works better in conveying the moment?

Yes. Absolutely! Obviously this is a crop of the first version and I much prefer it. The baby's face is easier to see and we are seeing a larger % of the photo used for the 'bystanders' and their facial expressions as they soak in the wonder of the new baby. And I prefer the non-sepia version too, as you might have guessed. IMO this is a superior photo compared to the original.

A Little Wonder - alterative crop, no processing

Finally, I had a look at your gallery and I really like the compositions of the kids, great stuff.

Thanks. Assuming you looked at the baby pics album, those are all of my son. Before he was born I didn't 'get' the whole kid- and baby-photo thing, or how strong a feeling they can convey. I'm a dad for sixteen months now and I think I 'get it'.

WilbaW wrote:

f3nr15 wrote:

here's a less processed version of the photo with a tighter crop, centred on the babe a little more - do you think this works better in conveying the moment?

A Little Wonder - alterative crop, no processing

If it were mine, I'd do something like this -

Wilba's crop

I cropped this on instinct, rather than by following any rules, by removing anything that didn't help to present the subject in a compelling way. It ended up pretty much square, coincidentally with the baby's "intimate triangle" (eye-eye-mouth) on an intersection of thirds, and the others eyes on the upper third. The dark hair forms a frame on the left and above, providing a visual balance to the angelic face, and the triangle formed by your wife's eyes, the girl's eyes, and the baby's face draws my attention to the tender connection between them. Lovely shot, thanks for sharing.

I agree, and it crossed my mind that there was some wasted area in the right side of the photo (in both its original and OP-cropped versions). This is the strongest composition, but my self I'd still let the sepia toning go.

Yehuda, I'm surprised to hear you say that the photo is perfect.  I believe you used to post lots of photos on the Sony Talk Forum many many years ago.  If I remember correctly, your people pictures were outstanding.  Are you that same person?  I would think that (if you were the photographer of this child) that you would have done better.  The child as a subject could be considered "perfect", but in my opinion the whole image could be improved.  Often we know there's room for improvement, but we also know that "perfect" is a subjective term.

Why would you consider it perfect?  You wouldn't have done this differently?

There's nothing I really like about this photos.  I can't see her face and she really isn't doing anything.

tonyinport wrote:

I think you have a wonderful photo. If mum likes it then what does it matter whether someone else does or not. Having said that, I appreciate that you want to improve in your photography. That is my story as well. This is what I did.

Got a good camera.

Took a photography course at a local community college to learn how to use my camera.

Read a few books about light and composition in photography.

Then did what my photography teacher told me.

Practise, practise, practise and then practise some more. It doesn't cost a lot to practice with digital photography.

Then find a photographer who's work you like and look at it, ask questions and then look at his photos again.

However, the greatest bit of advice I ever received was to become obsessed with light. I got that from an e-book from Digital School of Photography on using Natural light.

Then practise.

I am 55, purchased a camera 2 years ago and having having fun since, also in Australia.

Tony

Hi Tony!

I like your approach - what books did you read, and which would you recommend?

I've been looking at the Canon photography workshops - would love to take the portraiture one. The dates haven't become available yet, though, and I think I'd have to travel down to Sydney or interstate to do them.

Midwest wrote:

WilbaW wrote:

If it were mine, I'd do something like this -

Wilba's crop

I cropped this on instinct, rather than by following any rules, by removing anything that didn't help to present the subject in a compelling way. It ended up pretty much square, coincidentally with the baby's "intimate triangle" (eye-eye-mouth) on an intersection of thirds, and the others eyes on the upper third. The dark hair forms a frame on the left and above, providing a visual balance to the angelic face, and the triangle formed by your wife's eyes, the girl's eyes, and the baby's face draws my attention to the tender connection between them. Lovely shot, thanks for sharing.

I agree, and it crossed my mind that there was some wasted area in the right side of the photo (in both its original and OP-cropped versions). This is the strongest composition, but my self I'd still let the sepia toning go.

Actually, I have to admit that I really like this crop as well. I think I've been trying too hard to stick to more traditional crop/photo sizes, but I guess its really about whatever optimizes the end result.

tonyinport wrote:

We are in Port Macquarie, New South Wales. Wish you were closer. Tony

I'm in Newcastle!

Not too far from you, Tony

f3nr15 wrote:

Midwest wrote:

WilbaW wrote:

If it were mine, I'd do something like this -

Wilba's crop

I cropped this on instinct, rather than by following any rules, by removing anything that didn't help to present the subject in a compelling way. It ended up pretty much square, coincidentally with the baby's "intimate triangle" (eye-eye-mouth) on an intersection of thirds, and the others eyes on the upper third. The dark hair forms a frame on the left and above, providing a visual balance to the angelic face, and the triangle formed by your wife's eyes, the girl's eyes, and the baby's face draws my attention to the tender connection between them. Lovely shot, thanks for sharing.

I agree, and it crossed my mind that there was some wasted area in the right side of the photo (in both its original and OP-cropped versions). This is the strongest composition, but my self I'd still let the sepia toning go.

Actually, I have to admit that I really like this crop as well. I think I've been trying too hard to stick to more traditional crop/photo sizes, but I guess its really about whatever optimizes the end result.

I do most of my cropping with the Canon Digital Photo Professional program which has a variety of aspect ratios for cropping as well as just 'free' rectangle option, and I think I've used most of the settings they offer. This crop is a good lesson and example of not wasting a lot of space in a photograph, whether it's too much sky or too much foreground or just too much spare area around the real subject. I like to crop because often I find a very good photo inside a merely good one. Cropping this one in this way made it really excellent.

tonyinport wrote:

We ought to get together for a photo walk sometime.

Tony

That would be great, I would love to learn something of landscape photography!