More of my daughter

[ionian]

I've tried some photoshop actions I found on the web in for portraits to help simplify my PS workflow. Comments on the shots below are most welcome.

1.
Here I've gone for shallow depth of field, and the scene was lit with natural light from above. I love sparkly eyes but I realise it might be too much for many tastes.





2.
I've also used shallow DOF here, but could have probably benefited from stopping down a couple more stops. In PP I've tried a light teal/orange split tone on the background, with a subtle orange light leak up top. I think it warms up the image a little but it may be too gimmicky / instagram.

[Manfred M]

Simon - you have two beautiful images of your daughter. When mine were that age and a camera came out, they would run away (and to a certain extent this is still true today; they are both in their 20's).

A few thoughts for you.

1. The reflections in your daughters eyes in the first shot give that image a lot of "life". Definitely try to include these as they really make the shot. In studio photography, photographers will set up the lights to ensure we see the catchlights in the subject's eyes.

If you look at your second shot, they are more subdued and I find the shot is not quite as strong as the first one, for this reason.

2. Shallow DoF - this is a technique I love using in portraiture, but I would like to point out one thing. One still has to be careful regarding the makeup and location of the background. While shallow DoF can (and does) throw it nicely out of focus, it can still end up leaving a distracting element in the background. Both of your shots show a bit of this effect.

The metadata shows both shots were taken at f/3.2. With your crop frame sensor, this is the full-frame equivalent of f/4.5. ( lose the equivalent of a full stop between FF and the APS-C sensor of your D7100, so these shots were taken at more of a "moderate" aperture. The Nikkor f/1.8 is decently sharp, even wide open. You might want to consider trying this to get an even more out of focus background.

[kdoc856]

Simon,

Lovely child. I've asked this forum t so often to forbear my images of my grand-daughters that I am compelled to view any child shots, and these shots are lovely. I am a particular fan of the first image - love the processing and the DoF, and the eyes are exactly the way I prefer them. Would have preferred a more homogenously dark background, but this wasn't a studio shot and you had no control over that.

The 2nd shot doesn't strike me as strongly but is well done. Those marvelous eyes aren't as revealed, and we aren't drawn into her personality nearly as much. The vertical aspects of the BG are a little distracting. The first image is absolutely printable, the 2nd is just a nice shot.

I love to shoot my granddaughters with an 85 mm lense at f/1.4 or 1.8 - love the bokeh, but miss some nice shots because the DoF is just miniscule, and the little critters rarely hold still for a perfect focus. But when it works, it really works.

[Shadowman]

Nice captures.

[NorthernFocus]

I love the light on the hair and the sparkling eyes in the first shot. Looks like you got a selfie in the reflection in her eyes. The BG is a bit messy but nicely blurred with the wide aperture. Nicely done.

[ionian]

Many thanks for the kind comments - I agree that the first one is by far the stronger. I had a play this morning to see if I could neutralise that background, but my "refine edge" skills really leave something to be desired. I think the soft focus hair makes it particularly tricky (in my defence), but I have yet to get that tool to work as well as it should according to the tutorial videos.

Manfred / Kevin - in the past I have tried to shoot her wide open, but the depth of field becomes unmanageable with someone who won't sit still for anyone. My hit/miss ratio takes a nose dive. She's very patient with Daddy and his camera, as long as I leave the flash in the bag. Here she was strapped in to a high chair so she had no choice! I'm doing a newborn shoot in 2 weeks time, and will shoot at 1.8 for that as the little one can't move yet

[Manfred M]

Simon - use a single focus point at the centre of the focus screen and focus on the eye closest to the camera by partially depressing the shutter release. Recompose / reframe slightly and you will have a shallow DoF image. Your "keeper" rate will go way up if you master this focus and recompose technique.

It literally takes a fraction of a second to take the shot after you focus.

[just me]

Very nice photo of a beautiful little girl ........

Griddi.....

[IzzieK]

One word when I saw #1 -- WoW!!! What a shot! Pretty little child you have there, Simon.

[ionian]

Her looks are all her Mother's, which believe me is a relief for us all!

Here is one more from the same day. I have been looking for a candidate for a high-key portrait, I think this is it. All the exposure was added in post; I know it can be done SOOC but I prefer the control I can get with grad filters in LR, starting with a neutral raw file. Obviously it's candid, and I'm not sure if that arm is causing a problem - I think not because it's her eyes that you concentrate on, but I'd be happy to hear dissenting opinions!

[Rebel]

Love the first two simon, they are perfect... not a fan of the effect in the last one though sorry.

[Sergio M.]

I like all three shots, Simon. It's good to see your adorable little model again.

Sergio

[Manfred M]

Simon - if you want to see a well done high key image that is properly exposed, take a look at Dan's (the second edit) of polar bears in a snowstorm. It covers off all of the points that Bill and I made: lighting, background and subject matter colours.

Mama and Baby Bears(image heavy)


Your latest posting is an overexposed image where you have lost most of the detail in the skin. This is definitely does not work at all for me.

[ionian]

Your latest posting is an overexposed image where you have lost most of the detail in the skin. This is definitely does not work at all for me.

You are right Manfred, of course - I'm not going to try and argue with you about the technical aspects of the shot and I appreciate the link. I was attempting to ape a style of portrait I have seen some commercial photographers use, and while it is overexposed and suffers from loss of detail my understanding is that this is a viable commercial option. However, at least I now know for the future not to try and sell you one of my "angelic" blown out images

I genuinely appreciate your comments, so I'll try to keep the novelty stuff to a minimum.

[Rebel]

The loss of detail doesn't bother me, who cares? Not everything has to be technically perfect? To sacrifice some technical details in favour of aesthetics is a good thing to me.

Its the tone of the sepia thats not to my taste

[Manfred M]

You are right Manfred, of course - I'm not going to try and argue with you about the technical aspects of the shot and I appreciate the link. I was attempting to ape a style of portrait I have seen some commercial photographers use, and while it is overexposed and suffers from loss of detail my understanding is that this is a viable commercial option. However, at least I now know for the future not to try and sell you one of my "angelic" blown out images

I genuinely appreciate your comments, so I'll try to keep the novelty stuff to a minimum.

Simon - I know a number of commercial photographers quite well and have discussed "trends" in photography with them. These people are always on the outlook for new ideas that will give their business an edge over the competition.

I remember discussing this look with them (the ones I run into most often are a husband and wife team of portrait / wedding photographers). Their comment is that some people like this style when viewed on a computer screen, but the prints look terrible. They shoot so that they can supply their clients in either format and only shoot so that they can go either way.

In some ways, (I've said it before), my "classical" / "traditional" training comes through in how I look at images. A well exposed high key image will look good on screen or print (and I do a fair number of prints), a poorly exposed one, I am not fond of.

[IzzieK]

Aw...consider me a novice in photography, but I like the last one, too -- different. And she is such a perfect model.