Little ones

[ocnsprt]

So I have come across this post processing technique for my baby shoots that I think is really neat and gives the photos a unique look, i am curious what you all think, is it ugly??? My clients havent said anything yet and Im not sure theyve seen it or not so i dont know if its a cool look or annoying.
Also How is the composition of this shot, I have become quite fond of intimate baby shots and this is one of my favs, but is it to close or missing something? Is the dof ok as well in this shot? I have been playing around with my lens the past couple shoots learning what it can do and I think I am starting to get the hang of things, thanks for your comments (:

also I am learning the technicalities of shooting so for those of you familiar with the way you should shoot this type of shot under these circumstances, are my camera setting ok? what should I have done differently


link to set http://www.flickr.com/photos/sadilan...7617939314255/




Camera: Canon EOS 40D
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 109 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: -1/3 EV
Flash: On, Fired

[KajeYomama]

Its a beautiful shot, though I think I'd prefer a little bit more of the baby's face. the baby seems just a little bit too hidden even as it gets closer (towards the right of the photo). The arm and the face has a great look to it (for the softness) though the body (as it gets further) seems to be a little strange (like its becoming deformed?). Thats not too bad though. I think I'd just like to see more of the baby's face and perhaps both hands. all just personal taste though. beautiful shot regardless.

<3Kaje

[ocnsprt]

Originally Posted by KajeYomama

Its a beautiful shot, though I think I'd prefer a little bit more of the baby's face. the baby seems just a little bit too hidden even as it gets closer (towards the right of the photo). The arm and the face has a great look to it (for the softness) though the body (as it gets further) seems to be a little strange (like its becoming deformed?). Thats not too bad though. I think I'd just like to see more of the baby's face and perhaps both hands. all just personal taste though. beautiful shot regardless.

<3Kaje

I agree more of the face wouldve been better, but I think as is it looks snuggly and comfortable, thanks for your advice and comments (:

[ttosifa]

You might consider getting away from on-camera flash, especially if you are going to be taking pictures of sleeping babies and cakes. The harsh specular highlights here emphasize the baby's oily skin and, IMO, make the shot look unprofessional. A nice diffuse light with softer transfer between specular and diffused highlights would better suit an image of a peaceful baby.

I am not sure if you added a vignette in post or if you zoomed in/snooted your flash, but I find the focal point of the lighting to be his right cheek. I think if the forehead has not been darkened (originally or in post) that the whole face would be the focal point, which I personally would prefer.

[Trader]

I like it just the way it is and I would be surprised if your client doesn't like it also.

[zephod]

I have to agree with Ttosifa. You really should start thinking about off camera lighting. A soft diffuse light in a photograph really makes a huge difference. I know you've probably seen a lot of recommendations for the strobist (http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/) website and I have to reiterate that it is one of the best lighting resources I've seen.

You have some great photos and I am by no means an expert (yet). I just think your photography would explode with off camera lighting.

Doug

[WooD]

I think it's too nice. Any Mother would love it.

What type of flash are you using? If your shooting with a speed light, I'd look into one of those lightspher things if you don't want to get off camera yet.

[ocnsprt]

Originally Posted by WooD

I think it's too nice. Any Mother would love it.

What type of flash are you using? If your shooting with a speed light, I'd look into one of those lightspher things if you don't want to get off camera yet.

Thanks for all your comments, I am well aware I need to get an off camera flash, I am jsut starting out in photography and cant afford a flash yet, it is next on my wish list and now that I am booking regular jobs it will come sooner than I thought. I use alot of naturall lighting and try to use my flash only when I must, the lighting here is alot of post processing and its an effect I like, but its not for everyone, my client loved it, but not all of them do.
Wood I cant wait to get an off camera flash, trust me i am more than comfortable shooting with it off camera I just cant affor one yet, i have the stand just need the moolah (:
Thanks again for your critiques

[zephod]

Originally Posted by ocnsprt

Thanks for all your comments, I am well aware I need to get an off camera flash, I am jsut starting out in photography and cant afford a flash yet, it is next on my wish list and now that I am booking regular jobs it will come sooner than I thought. I use alot of naturall lighting and try to use my flash only when I must, the lighting here is alot of post processing and its an effect I like, but its not for everyone, my client loved it, but not all of them do.
Wood I cant wait to get an off camera flash, trust me i am more than comfortable shooting with it off camera I just cant affor one yet, i have the stand just need the moolah (:
Thanks again for your critiques

I meant to include this last night but somehow forgot. Maybe try a diffuser. The one from Gary Fong is supposed to be pretty good and should give you a little softer light. I'm really having to retrain my eye. Coming to still photography from video it's such a different beast. I've included a link for you to see what I'm talking about.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Diffuser.html

Anyway keep up the great work.

Doug