Critique My Shot

[gns1497]

I'm relatively new to serious digital photography, but since taking my first "basics" course a couple weekends ago, I have been addicted. Whethor it stays a hobby or becomes more, I love to shoot.

I was lucky enough to catch my daughters in the magic hour this evening under several large trees. The sun was shining down on them through a "gap" just perfectly, and my 18 month old (usually not very cooperative), jumped into the scene with my 5 year old as we were shooting, and I got 1 shot before the young one turned and ran the other way. I had to edit the shot because I thought it was a tad underexposed, however, my wife liked the original better than the lightened version. I thought I'd post here and get a few opinions on which version some of you guys liked best.

I also made several other versions (black & white, sepia, etc). Any suggestions/comments are welcome.

Original shot in Manual mode with my Nikon D200 at f/5.0, 1/60 sec, ISO 100.

http://webpages.charter.net/outback/Gallery/index.htm


Thanks!

[jiminyClickit]

gns1497, Welcome

Your lightened version, for people who don't know what your children look like is better, even while your wife enjoys the original. I would go a step further and lighten the faces more, and move away from the blue into a sunnier, warmer skin tone.

[clockdoc]

Welcome to the group. My preference is for a lighter version. I also like the one in black and white. Nice work!

[ELAY]

Great shot, and nice work on all the different versions. The poses are great and the "rim light" really works here.

Yes to lightening a bit more, and I agree with JC re white balance. I'm not suggesting you turn your kids orange, but have a look at the T-shirts if you want to get a sense of the colour balance in this shot -- try to warm this shot until they look whiter.

EL

PS -- It is my resolution this week to try to make suggestions to people directed at making the Critique forum work better for everybody. So, my suggestions for you are that you try to embed photos in the thread (granted you had a lot of versions), and to try to give us basic EXIF-type settings for the shot so that when giving critique we have an understanding of the settings you used for the shot (if they were available through your hosting site I couldn't find them).

[gns1497]

Thanks for the input. I'm also fairly new to photoshop editing as well.

Elay, I'll experiment with the white balance. I do see what you are talking about, just havent got the photoshop experience to do much editing yet. Been doing alot of reading since I took my "basics" class and have spent most of my time studying exposure and lighting. I have plans to also become more familiar with photoshop.

Also, when you say EXIF-type settings, what are you looking for other than ISO, Apeture, and shutter speed? I'll be glad to add that data.

Again,

Thanks for all the help. This forum is great.

[ELAY]

Also, when you say EXIF-type settings, what are you looking for other than ISO, Apeture, and shutter speed? I'll be glad to add that data.

Well I have two choices. I can pretend that I saw the info first time through and say that I want to know about your lens and focal length too (which helps). Or I can fess up and say that I probably jumped right into your link and then didn't see the info you posted. (An argument for embedding pics in the post!)

I don't have photoshop, so I don't know how to do it in Photoshop, but because it is such a common adjustment even the most basic photo editors have pretty accessible controls for white balance -- sometimes it is a matter of just one slider (cool to warm); sometimes a matter of a few sliders.

But great photo.

EL

[gns1497]

I would have embedded on the post, but since there were so many versions of the image, that's why I didnt. I probably should have added focal length and lens type. I'll remember to do that next time.

I think I do remember a "cool to warm" slider. I'm just learning photoshop, but I think I remember seeing that somewhere. I'll give it a shot. Thanks for the feedback.

Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR II
Focal length: 82mm
Focal length in 35mm Film: 123mm

[clockdoc]

For me the focal length in terms of the digital spec helps me to determine whether the photographer was shooting at the 'wide-angle' end of their lens or towards the 'telephoto' end. Also if they are using a prime lens, it helps to know that. As I recall, you can add up to 4 images in a posting, if needed for comparison/clarification. Just remember to use the smaller version if you are posting from flickr and that Smiley faces count as one of your images.