Swing

[mammarazzi]

My great niece Mya having fun on a swing

[Donald]

Myra

I hope the following makes sense.

I was going to post a comment that focused on the lack of tonal variation I felt was in it, that was causing your neice, I thought, to be 'melting'; into the background; i.e. not popping out. But then ...........

I thought that what was needed was a crop at the left hand side just from the base of that angled support (not the nearest one, but the one over the fence). That would also take out the person and the vertical wall in the middle ground on the left.

But what really got me was that doing this completely changed my first thoughts about the contrast and tones. Weird! Don't know why (still thinking my way through it), but in my head the crop transforms the image. And I think you then have a very good image.

Must go and lie down!


EDIT - Think you have dust bunny top right. Or is it a bird? PS to Edit - It's a bird!

[Daisy Mae]

A lovely happy, yet somehow tranquil shot. really nicely done.

( I'd crop out the woman on the far left and the building with her...to give a better focus on that lovely girl and her happy moment)

Looks like i am late ..lol

[mammarazzi]

Suggestions noted, acted upon and very pleased with result

[Viana]

Nice photo of Mya!


I would also crop out the woman. OTOH, you could consider a motion blur:

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Joanne,

Along the lines of Viana's edit, I was looking for a narrower Depth of Field (wider aperture) to blur all the houses, car and street behind.

[Colin Southern]

Suggestions noted, acted upon and very pleased with result

Perhaps the other thing to keep in mind is that not every photo needs to be a work of art -- in my opinion it's nothing less than a great family photo; it won't sell thousands of copies for hundreds of thousands of dollars - it probably won't even win any "awards" - but it WILL be remembered and treasured as part of the family's history for ever more (and there's nothing wrong with that!).

[Viana]

Perhaps the other thing to keep in mind is that not every photo needs to be a work of art -- in my opinion it's nothing less than a great family photo; it won't sell thousands of copies for hundreds of thousands of dollars - it probably won't even win any "awards" - but it WILL be remembered and treasured as part of the family's history for ever more (and there's nothing wrong with that!).

Still, every photo should be the best it can be—especially for those of us who are serious about photography. They are, after all, a reflection of our skills and the desires of those photographed.


We all have plenty of shoe-boxes full of photos that will never see the light of day because they are so bad. I remember going through unflattering photos with elderly relatives and friends, as they complained about how they “really did not look like that.”


These days, most people have the ability to enhance even an ordinary, family photo. IMHO, every photo should reflect the mood, the subject and the photographer's vision.

[Colin Southern]

Still, every photo should be the best it can be—especially for those of us who are serious about photography. They are, after all, a reflection of our skills and the desires of those photographed.

I hear what you're saying, but the flip side is that theres also a danger of people getting caught up trying to turn every photo into a "trophy" shot, which in-turn can mean that they start avoiding taking shots that are unlikely to "measure up" (I've been guilty of this myself, a LOT, in the past), and when that happens, priceless family memories get lost.

So I'm not suggesting that folks don't invest a little time and effort fixing the basics (levels etc), but I do think there's a danger with shots like this of people seeing it as a "shot that needs X amount of work done to it", whereas I think it's just a great shot to "step back and smell the roses with" - and thus not worry about faking DoF - or adding motion blur - or cloning out people in the background etc etc etc.

[Viana]

I hear what you're saying, but the flip side is that theres also a danger of people getting caught up trying to turn every photo into a "trophy" shot, which in-turn can mean that they start avoiding taking shots that are unlikely to "measure up" (I've been guilty of this myself, a LOT, in the past), and when that happens, priceless family memories get lost.

No “trophy” shot at all, Colin. Just the best shot it can be. It seems that the OP is interested in that given that the pix of the lovely girl was posted here for review.

So I'm not suggesting that folks don't invest a little time and effort fixing the basics (levels etc), but I do think there's a danger with shots like this of people seeing it as a "shot that needs X amount of work done to it", whereas I think it's just a great shot to "step back and smell the roses with" - and thus not worry about faking DoF - or adding motion blur - or cloning out people in the background etc etc etc.

The photo needs very little. Nothing that would take more than a couple of minutes. I don’t think that anyone suggested cloning people out of the background—but rather, cropping. The object (to me) is the focus on the girl and the motion of the swing. Motion blur is a matter of taste, but it would take care of the distracting background and give the photo a distinct sense of movement—which is what swinging does.


General PSP is not difficult and not very time consuming provided people use the right software and learn the ropes. In terms of speed and a low learning curve, I would recommend Lightroom above Photoshop every time.