Can I Have A Critique Please?

[Whateverr]

I recently been dipping my toes in the photography pond and I decided to take some photos of my younger brother and sister for my mum for christmas. Nothing special, just some black and white photos taken in the natural light which I got printed and set up in a frame.

When my mum saw the photo below, she just cried and cried saying that the photo just "said something" and that it was a "raw, emotive photo that says more than words" :rolleyes: I dont actually think that it is very good, the ISO could have been played around with, the window frame could have been removed (top right hand corner) and some other settings as well but when she said that I thought that I might ask some experts what they think? Its not photoshopped at all..

Does it "say something", is it "raw" and "emotive"? Or is it what I think it is, just a simple black and white portrait that could be improved on??

Edited December 17, 2008 by Abbey B

[rugerfly]

Im not really arty at all or a photographer of any sorts what soever, so my opinion is just my own opinion.

I love it. I just dont love his head being chopped off at the top.

[Whateverr]

Thanks.

I dont really like the head being chopped either :rolleyes:

[Clyde]

I'm not a photographer so don't understand the lingo or techniques but I like it too. Although as I like things structured I also think it would look better with his head not chopped.

I love the light across his shoulder and the dimple in his chin. He's a very 'pretty' boy. It's also caught wisps of hair, I like that the hair isn't overly neat.

I think it's lovely.

[Vickie]

I think it's lovely too. I am always chopping the tops of heads off :rolleyes: .

My only comment would be that I would prefer a little more contrast...but that is a personal thing.

[Whateverr]

:rolleyes:

Edited December 17, 2008 by Abbey B

[Gayle.]

Can I have your permission to download it and have a bit of a play with it, then upload an edited version? I'd like to show you what might be done with a very simple edit.

[Whateverr]

Yeh, feel free. I like to see what other people can do :rolleyes:

[Gayle.]

Here you go. Big crop to get down to the serious stuff. Photography is about leaving things out of the frame, I've simply cropped out the superfluos stuff and left the important stuff.......the raw emotion. Also did a bit of a contrast adjustment and sharpened it slightly.

[Whateverr]

thats so good :rolleyes:

[rocco]

No professional here, but agree with others on contrast (easily fixed) and head crop making his head look elongated. I think if I had that on my wall the sun shadow on the shoulder might bug me eventually. Otherwise the raw capture is very nice. :rolleyes: Good job.

[Ashanali]

It's a nice shot Abbey. :D

Of course there are things that can be played with and altered and people are likely to have different ways of doing things, but the SOOC (straight out of camera) image is still very nice.

I would do a slightly different crop to Gayle but along the same lines.

[Whateverr]

Thanks :D

I've been playing around with contrast and things, this is a good thread. I like learning different things.

[PossumCorner]

... Does it "say something", is it "raw" and "emotive"? ...

It is a nice shot of a kid with his head down - whether the photographer posed him like that, or he was being sulky-boots and wouldn't look at the camera. So rather than showing the personality it sort of masks it. In a portrait, I really prefer to see the eyes if it is to portray "the real person" - windows to the soul and all that. I'm not a real fan of the current top-of-head-removed photographic portraits, it's almost like a fad, must follow the in-crowd. I like the top of head included plus a bit of breathing space above it. But if cut, yes go for the closer crop as GayleK did, so it look full on intentional rather than an oops look. Same with dogs, either full head, or close crop, but not just an undecided flattening of the skull.

I guess I can understand the Mum's reaction - mums are like that. Lots of mums get very teary when they first see the studio shots of their children, and that in itself is an emotional moment worth capturing, defences down and the true feelings. What I find interesting is that many mothers snob studio portraits, have a newish DSLR, and say "I'd much rather have my photos of them at home, they are so much more natural, they don't look posed". Yet these happy snaps with the garden hose and the dead pot-plant in the background - well they don't generally have the same effect on the mums (or even on dog owners in general).

Yet a studio style portrait generally has a really emotive effect, even if the "studio" is just a chair near a window with natural light. Is it more the intent of taking a shot that will reflect the personality in that moment: or in having taken enough time and finding the right pose, right light, right background? Don't know. But any portrait is taken in a sense as a commissioned work: whether requested by the "sitter", or the mum, or the dog owner. So the reaction of that person is the important thing, and in the case of this shot it had a profound effect on your Mum and that makes it a fantastic portrait. It is hers, she loves it, and her response is the only critique that really counts.

Out of interest, I'd like for you to make two fresh prints, your original unaltered as she has seen it: the other with all the tweaks talked about here including the crop, etc. etc. Hand her the two prints, do not repeat not say "this is the original, this is the revised version" just hand her the two prints and ask for her reaction to both.

On a second and third look, I'm now back towards the original. It allows more of a dreamy quality, and is less of a forceful close-up intrusive style.

[Whateverr]

wow! Thanks for that!!

I'm not in any studio, infact, I dont have any "qualifications" either other than my own ability to take a photo. He wasnt posed like that, he didnt even know i was taking the photo :D It was just taken near my back window, sitting on the stairs, focusing on some lolly or something :D

I have another on where he is looking at the camera if you would like to see that?

[rugerfly]

I like the crop Gayle and the other stuff.

[kja]

First, it is an interesting shot. Well done!

Second, parents will often react most strongly to an image they identify with rather than one that is "technically" or "artistically" more correct. Just go with it and enjoy The point, if you aren't just shooting for yourself, is to make your viewer happy. If you have done that, then don't sweat anything else for that image ... take the advice and constructive criticism you receive about a particular image and maybe apply it next time, just to have options. There is more than one way to skin a cat and you will never please everyone - so experiment and learn what pleases you.

I like the original and I like the crop version. I'd probably play with it a bit more and make it even more "pre-teen boy" ... but I might end up liking the orignal the best anyway!

Yes, I'd love to see some versions with his eyes

[rubiton]

I prefer the original (yes I know strict photography rule of thirds says things should be off centre for greater artistic look but I dont like way off centre personally - with horses you give them a tiny lead space but to most it looks centrally cropped). Apart from chopping the top of his head off however that comes with experience and practice (not chopping heads off).

[chris.p.day]

I think the only thing I can add is the usually stated purpose of B&W and why photo's can look so much better in B&W!

B&W is used when you would like to bring out the texture of something, so in this photo the first thing you look at is the hair (fantastic texture) which draws your eyes down the photo, you can't see the eyes, so you keep moving down the photo, then BANG! the sunlight on the shoulder...this draws you into the photo and into the world of the photo. Where was he sitting? What is he looking at?

Because it's in B&W you can remove some of the distractions (like bokeh is used to remove distractions from the background). Eg. imagine the wall behind him was painted a garish pink colour, B&W instantly removes that distraction!

I'm probably talking out of my bum...but hopefully it explains something.