Been a while

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852
Been a while

I haven't been here for ages. Can I ask for C&C on these of my daughter? Thanks.

SS 1/100
ISO 400
AP 2.8
IMG_3675

SS 1/100
ISO 400
AP 2.8
IMG_3672

Offline
Last seen: 4 years 2 months ago
Joined: 05/10/07
Posts: 427

the lighting is better on her face in #1 than #2. can't comment on the colour her, but man...i'd kill for (consistent) awesome focus like that at 2.8 Smile

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

"Gehana" wrote:

the lighting is better on her face in #1 than #2. can't comment on the colour her, but man...i'd kill for (consistent) awesome focus like that at 2.8 Smile

Oh wow you think my focus is good??? It's the one area I have always sucked in Lol Thanks!

Offline
Last seen: 2 days 19 hours ago
Joined: 10/26/01
Posts: 3596

First off ... can I just say how much she's GROWN since you last posted?!?!?!?! Both of your kids have really CHANGED! *sniff, sniff* It's hard to be a mom. Smile

#1 looks AWESOME!!! Light, focus, color! WOW! I love everything about this one!

#2 looks a touch under exposed. it also looks a bit on the warm side, but that may be my monitor. Focus on both look really nice.

Glad to have you back! Hope we see a whole lot more from you. Smile

WB!
GiGi

coolmama72's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 2 months ago
Joined: 10/20/01
Posts: 8185

glad to see you popping in!

the first looks good to me in terms of color and focus ... but I'm not a fan of the composition. I feel like the whole photo needs a little bit of tilt (not to straighten her, per se, but to give her background some tilt to go with hers). the second looks under exposed to me, did you shoot in RAW?

Jeffininer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 2 months ago
Joined: 11/07/07
Posts: 1796

I don't think we've met, but Hi Smile

I like the first. I think it's well exposed and fun! The second does seem underexposed and I wish you had a bit more with the catchlights. It almost looks like you used flash.

La123's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 10 months ago
Joined: 04/11/08
Posts: 815

#1 looks good to me. The one thing that bothers me a bit is the crop. Is this an in camera crop? I would take off some of the top, and possibly add onto the bottom, to get her eyes in the upper third. #2 does look like it needs some brightening. It should be an easy fix though. Maybe for next time you could turn her a little bit to make sure the catchlights are not in her pupil. I have his this problem before, when shooting in low light, so I know it can be tough. Smile

EL2
EL2's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 12 months ago
Joined: 12/05/07
Posts: 1665

Welcome back Sue. These are great snaps of your daughter. The background is a bit distracting, but the first photo is exposed good, the second one just needs a bit of brightening up.

Can't wait to see more of your photo.

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

"coolmama72" wrote:

glad to see you popping in!

the first looks good to me in terms of color and focus ... but I'm not a fan of the composition. I feel like the whole photo needs a little bit of tilt (not to straighten her, per se, but to give her background some tilt to go with hers). the second looks under exposed to me, did you shoot in RAW?

No not in RAW just manual. What does RAW do?

coolmama72's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 2 months ago
Joined: 10/20/01
Posts: 8185

RAW gives you more flexibility when you're editing - you can adjust exposure in RAW without much degradation to the image (when you adjust in jpeg, you start degrading the image more quickly).

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852

"coolmama72" wrote:

RAW gives you more flexibility when you're editing - you can adjust exposure in RAW without much degradation to the image (when you adjust in jpeg, you start degrading the image more quickly).

Ah ok thanks, I will try shooting in RAW next time and see what happens! ::runs to find daughter::