baby

[Bootsy]

these 2 are work in progress so c&c welcome.

[heather4279]

I like them

~Heather

[Wirefox]

Absolutely love them Bootsy. The second one particularly is very evocative. I think I am seeing a fair bit of noise in the background of No2. If these were shot in raw it could probably stand removal of some of the noise without taking anything from the image. Having said that the strength of the image pales that small gripe into insignificance.

Steve

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Bootsy,

I too wondered about the noise levels, but decided with the soft-focus, B&W look, you probably left it there on purpose.

No.2 is my favourite, but I would take down the level of that diagonal blob in the upper left background, so it's not the brightest thing in shot. Maybe also same with the light through the gap between (your?) fingers.

Nice shots, well done,

[Wirefox]

I too wondered about the noise levels, but decided with the soft-focus, B&W look, you probably left it there on purpose.

I cannot make my mind up if it is high ISO noise or lack of light getting to the sensor and low ISO. The first image can pass for film grain but the background in No2 looks a little too digital to me.

If I am talking tommy rot just give me a nudge and the needle usually jumps back into he right groove.

Steve

[Dave Humphries]

Looking at the EXIF data; both shot at ISO 400 on a Canon 400D, so in between.

Maybe it was even added or enhanced in PP?

[Bootsy]

thanks for the comments.these 2 pics were taken on the sper of the moment and one handed and i was just trying out a new 50 m m lens and a few different settings.so high iso for speed over camera shake and no flash as our baby kicks off with flash (he was little grumpy).so noise was not added but left as it is because i like it.the more i look first one.the more i feel i over processed it to much in the b&w conversion.i was tryng to show different texures in our skin.the second one i done more of a straight b&w conversion.