Another shot at child portraiture.
Natural light in heavy overcast with a fill flash.
Phillip, age 20 months.
jeep_daddy wrote:
If he would just smile!
He usually does. I tried for several shots of him smiling but to no avail today.
JR1
Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK
I will do many forms of photography but in my opinion, landscape and portrait are the most difficult, so I don't try.
Well shot
Erv
Loc: Medina Ohio
Very nice Tom!!! Boy he is looking like a big guy now. Slowly loosing the baby look. Take a lot of them!!
Erv
You are paying him for all this posing aren't you ?
Sarge69
JR1 wrote:
I will do many forms of photography but in my opinion, landscape and portrait are the most difficult, so I don't try.
Well shot
Thanks JR1! I agree. Portraiture (especially kids) is very difficult for me. I figure if I can get halfway decent at this then everything else should be easier. Lol.
Erv wrote:
Very nice Tom!!! Boy he is looking like a big guy now. Slowly loosing the baby look. Take a lot of them!!
Erv
Thanks, Erv! He is still not that big. The only reason I am posting these is because you are. Lol.
sarge69 wrote:
You are paying him for all this posing aren't you ?
Sarge69
You ought to see how he signs the model release form!
tainkc wrote:
Natural light in heavy overcast with a fill flash.
Nice portrait Tom :thumbup:
Not bad but the lighting is flat...there are no shadows at all. Not to mention the unflattering "center of the eye" catchlight.
Shade is good but you still need to get "side lighting" if you are going to do a portrait. Get someone with a 2' x 2' piece of foamcore board and put them on his left or right side.
Or put him at the edge of the shade turned a bit so one side is lighter than the other and fill back into the shade side with a reflector or foamcore.
Just a thought.
It's a lovely shot tainkc. I usually prefer portraits of children when they're not smiling because they are more unusual. I'm not quite sure why so many people say "smile" to kids before they squeeze the shutter. Often what you get is a false or silly smile. I think you got it just right.
tainkc wrote:
Natural light in heavy overcast with a fill flash.
rpavich wrote:
Not bad but the lighting is flat...there are no shadows at all. Not to mention the unflattering "center of the eye" catchlight.
Shade is good but you still need to get "side lighting" if you are going to do a portrait. Get someone with a 2' x 2' piece of foamcore board and put them on his left or right side.
Or put him at the edge of the shade turned a bit so one side is lighter than the other and fill back into the shade side with a reflector or foamcore.
Just a thought.
Not bad but the lighting is flat...there are no sh... (
show quote)
Oops! I thought that this was what we were going for! My bad. We only had me and I am sure that Phillip would not do too good at holding up a reflector. I was trying to eliminate any side lighting.
Here is another one just slightly different that may be more to your liking. I am just guessing at everything at this point trying to absorb as much information as possible.
I always appreciate your input, Bob. Oh, and I was using a 75-300mm zoom.
One more.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.