Please critique this snapshot

[F.Gordon]

On the day that shall live in infamy I was "volunteered" to be the official photographer at a graduation party. Took about 120 snapshots. I have no desire to become a "pro" :crazy: but I'd like to be half way decent enough to take snapshots for friends when they ask me to.

On that day I had to shoot in dark rooms, bright sunlight, shade, clouds, no clouds, etc... drove me crazy. This one was taken in a dark room with a flash. I took quite a few protrait shots. So, what did I do wrong? What did I do right? Don't hold back. You don't have to be nice with me. I'm use to it. ;)

[Blue_In_AK]

1. Is she yours? She's adorable.

Good photography, too. :)

[F.Gordon]

3. LOL. No. Not mine

It would be a medical "miracle" for us to have children.

Thanks.
:hi:

Edit? :-(

[CornField]

2. The shadow

When you shoot inside and are using a direct-on flash, you'll end up with the shadow. One easy trick to prevent or minimize this is to move the person or group away from the wall or vertical objects.

Your subject sure is a cutie!

[F.Gordon]

5. The shadow is annoying

This little guy was sitting on mom's lap and I had to go with what I had. I think I could have eliminated the shadow if I shot it with mom in the background but that would have drawn attention away from the little guy.

Thanks for the tip. :) I guess I just need to start being pushy with people and putting them in the proper light and stuff.

[alfredo]

4. The parents will love it. I might crop out some of the background,

un-sharp mask it a bit then adjust the levels. It's not a bad picture, but it could use a crop and a slight adjustment on the levels. Of course you may like it darker than what I have done. My pictures tend to be dark and moody, but that would not be appropriate for this cute subject. You might want to play with the highlights on the forehead and cheek if you lighten it, but that is up to personal taste. Cute babies have shiny skins.

The original, then the altered copy





edited for speling

[F.Gordon]

6. That is a MUCH better version

I should have composed it better. Took out more of the background. I'm still light-years behind you on all this "photoshop" stuff, but I'm trying to learn.

[alfredo]

7. You just make a copy and play with it until you do it to your

satisfaction. That's how I learned Photoshop.

thanks for the compliment.

[RagingInMiami]

9. I've been learning PS in the last few months since I switched to digital

I bought PS Elements for Dummies, which gave me a basic understanding of PS. I still have a lot to learn, but at least I understand the basics, which can be complicated if you have no clue.

[F.Gordon]

10. There's a "Dummies" Book?

:thumbsup:

That is something I could handle. Will check it out.

[RagingInMiami]

12. I found out there's a "dummies" book for everything

Even for the guy who has trouble tying his shoelaces.

[alfredo]

18. It's taken me years to learn what I have learned, and I see it will

take a few more years before I feel I have a good working knowledge.

[ConsAreLiars]

13. I tried a loaner CD

of Photoshop and got nowhere. I then tried some paint program demos with little satisfaction. Elements was simpler and oriented toward photos, but it seemed awkward. I ended up with Picture Window Pro which was programmed from scratch by a photographer, and seems to follow the logic of darkroom work, and so made more sense to me. Just barely starting again, but the path toward using the more sophisticated features seems clear enough.

[Ms. Toad]

8. Here's my suggestions

With portraits, I'm pretty liberal with my digital darkroom work as far as background and temporary blemishes (aka my teen's occasional acne). I've played with your photo a bit:



I cropped the right near the shadow line to make the shadow less noticeable. If I were a purist I would have left the right side that way, but I've also colored in the wall just as an example of how to get rid of the shadow line. Painting wall into the shadow (or blurring it) is also possible, but harder to do nicely as a quick job.

Since I don't have the original and can't crop wider on the left to maintain a pleasing size and create balance I painted some extra in. (A quick job, so don't look too closely :) ).

I also brightened the picture up (moved it toward a warmer illumination and lightened it just a tad) to bring the cutie out a bit from the chair.

Edited for clarity.

[F.Gordon]

11. I really need to learn this "digital darkroom" stuff

Very nice for a "quick job". I wanted to post something else that I liked for suggestions, but I didn't want to compromise the whole privacy thing. This little cutie was the only 'safe' photo I could offer up for critique. But I've already seen from yours and alfredo's replies how I can improve my other snapshots.

For me, I guess old habits are hard to break. When I first starting taking snapshots I always felt that every photograph had to be done "in-camera". I even felt that some filters were "cheating". I need to get over that and realize that software is just part of the normal process now.

Thanks
:hi:

[Ms. Toad]

14. Since I started in a real darkroom,

I've also got some of the old habits and prejudices, but I'm also a bit of a computer geek.

It's an interesting philosophical discussion. If I'm trying to accurately record something I tend to think anything more than cropping or adjusting for color is cheating. Although if it is a person I am trying to capture, I would probably treat messing with the background as legitimate.

If I'm interested in the artistic appearance, I treat it as multi-media art rather than photography - and feel anything goes. Here is a a flower my daughter (Feli on DU) took:
(See - I told you in another thread that I might post a flower or two...)

She hasn't quite mastered the art of framing shots yet, so she occasionally snips off petals. I electronically painted the top part of the picture (from a hair above the bottom of the notch in the top petal of the violet). As far as technique - I copied a piece of the edge of one of the other petals, rotated it appropriately, and stretched it to match the cut edges. (Essentially the same thing I did to extend the chair in your picture - except I didn't need to rotate that.)

[F.Gordon]

16. Hold on... I still haven't read the "Dummies" book yet

I copied a piece of the edge of one of the other petals, rotated it appropriately, and stretched it to match the cut edges
:dunce:

Your daughter definitely has the proper eye for selecting the correct color of the subject. Blue. :) Very nice.

I've done some e-Art with my stylus pad, but I can't bring myself to carry those techniques over to photography. Maybe I should. I could improve some of the crap I've taken with a camera. I still believe that you can create "art" with your camera by only using what the camera "sees".

While I'm still trying to come up with something, this is one of my current personal 'finalist' snapshots for the June contest. I've done nothing to it other than a little cropping. For me... it looks less like a flower and more like a painting. I don't know if this will be my entry yet, but if it is I'll probably just leave it "as is". Well, I'll make it larger so the detail will show better.



I'm too anal to consider the philosophical aspects of photography vs art vs photography/art. But Ms F is trying to get me to think "outside the box"..... "outside the photograph". I'm tryin'.

[Blue_In_AK]

20. That's very pretty, F. I like it. n/t

[F.Gordon]

21. Thank you

:blush:

I know virtually nothing about flowers. I called it a "big orange tissue paper" flower. Ms F says it's a Poppy. I actually have had fun with this theme. I've been stoppin' at little parks and lakes all along the front range looking for perty flowers. Places I never knew even existed.... and I've lived here for quite a long time.

[ConsAreLiars]

15. Seems to be true for all of us old slide-shooters.

One reason I chose slide film is that it showed what I did with the camera rather than what the film processer and printer happened to do with it. Then I spent a while learning to make slides that resembled what I saw.

Now I discover that a scan is a good, but not perfect, variation on the slide. So now I am trying to learn how to get the digital version of the slide to look like the original.

And then there comes the challenge of dealing with the fact that there are a zillion ways to make the digital version even -better- than the slide.

[F.Gordon]

17. "a zillion ways" That's my problem

There are some here, like alfredo and ralps, that work toward a particular style that truly represents their own personal expression of photography as an art form. I like that.

I have no style. As I attempt this digital darkroom stuff do I narrow it down so I have a "style", or should each snapshot that I take be approached differently?

At this point I think I should avoid considering "style" and work on just trying to take a decent snapshots. If I can eventually develop an "artist mindset" with photography the style thing will hopefully just come to be on its own.

Too heavy for me. :crazy:

[Fovea]

19. I ask myself

which is more important, this *photograph* or this *image*?
Sometimes it goes either way.

[ConsAreLiars]

22. I regard the documentary aspect as primary, but the "meaning" of

a photo is in its ability to convey more than a surface impression. This depends on camera and darkroom technique - the art - and the darkroom is now a software program. Sometimes an image loses its impact when it begins to look false, sometimes it can get overprocessed to the point that it becomes so unreal as to be abstract and even iconic, and even true again.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

23. I did it fast and kind of sloppy, but you get the idea

would be how I would handle that photo.

of course what others have said would work too.

[AlCzervik]

24. 1st off lemme say she's friggin adorable!

ok having said that i find when taking pics of little ones it's always best to get on your knees and be at the same eye level as your subject, the other thing is the shadow, not digging that but you could always clone stamp it out with ps.