Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: The little one  (Read 1700 times)

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
The little one
« on: March 30, 2014, 09:33:01 pm »

Was lucky enough to capture this one of our little 2 years old yesterday, what do you guys think?



Otus 55mm f1.4 on D800.

Cheers,
Bernard

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22813
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: The little one
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2014, 10:58:00 pm »

What a charmer!
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Harald L

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 856
Re: The little one
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2014, 11:56:37 pm »

You must be lucky.

Harald
Logged
Glad to be an amateur

wolfnowl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5824
    • M&M's Musings
Re: The little one
« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2014, 01:54:03 am »

Definitely a cutie.  And the image is pretty good too! ;D

Mike.
Logged
If your mind is attuned t

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The little one
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2014, 06:09:25 am »

She's a cutie all right, but she needs to be closer to the right side of the frame so the walkway's leading lines help the composition. Her face also needs to come up with a bit of dodging.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: The little one
« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2014, 06:58:36 am »

Cute shot - but why do we need the D800+Otus info? Throw that away - it just detracts from the great shot.
Cheers
~Chris

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13794
Re: The little one
« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2014, 07:44:19 am »

Beautiful!
Logged
Francois

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: The little one
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2014, 07:46:12 am »

Thanks for the kind words and advise.

I fully agree that there would have been better subject positions from a composition standpoint, but I am unfortunately far from having the ability to tell a 2 years old, be it my daughter, where she must stand... with any degree of succes. There was zero direction here, this lasted 2 or 3 seconds. :)

As far as the description of the equipment used goes, I am not denying my equipment addiction, but how is a one liner below the image distracting?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: March 31, 2014, 08:11:20 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2299
Re: The little one
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2014, 08:46:01 am »

As far as the description of the equipment used goes, I am not denying my equipment addiction, but how is a one liner below the image distracting?

The short answer is - it's not.
Just Christoph's teutonic humour coming to the fore.

Edit:
Nothing stopping anyone clicking on the image to view it in a separate browser window .. where apart from the 'all-important' emotional content of the photo, techies can view a fine example of OTUS bokeh in all it's unaduterated glory and others can ponder the subtleties of framing [/sigh]
Logged

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2299
Re: The little one
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2014, 08:52:47 am »

Great shot, Bernard - you'll both appreciate candid shots such as this in years to come. Today she's two and before you know it sixteen - at which point candids will most definitely NOT be appreciated. But just wait until you're a grandfather and they'll be begging you for these sorts of memories.

M
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The little one
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2014, 09:20:08 am »

. . .I am unfortunately far from having the ability to tell a 2 years old, be it my daughter, where she must stand...

Having 4 kids, 17 grandkids, and, so far, 9 great-grandkids, Bernard, I'd be the last person in the world to suggest you try to tell a two-year-old where to stand, but I would suggest that you might have swung your camera a bit to the left. You don't really need the corner of the walkway in the picture and the kid is looking toward camera left. It's a minor point, but it's the kind of thing I sometimes lecture about: the need to internalize composition. Here's how I put it in "On Street Photography":

     ". . .there are two things you need to learn to do: First, you need to practice composition to the point where it becomes intuitive. You don't have time to line up all those elements of geometry with, say, the 'rule of thirds.' You have to see it whole in your viewfinder without stopping to analyze.

     "But in many cases to wait for your conscious mind to register both the facts and the geometry is to miss the picture. So, the second thing you need to do is learn not to rely on your conscious mind, but to rely on your unconscious: to react instinctively. There simply isn't time to think about it. In the end, to do good street photography you need to practice and practice and practice. You need to become so familiar with your camera that you don't have to think about it, any more than you have to think about shifting gears when you're driving a stick-shift car, and you have to be able to frame and shoot a properly composed picture without thinking about it -- with your unconscious making the decision."

In that essay I was talking specifically about street photography, but the same principles apply to any snapshooting, provided you're after something more than a tourist snapshot. Not thinking about your equipment is paramount, and considering the gratuitous information you added regarding camera and lens, I'm forced to conclude you do think about equipment.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2014, 09:21:48 am by RSL »
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: The little one
« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2014, 09:26:13 am »

Having 4 kids, 17 grandkids, and, so far, 9 great-grandkids, Bernard, I'd be the last person in the world to suggest you try to tell a two-year-old where to stand, but I would suggest that you might have swung your camera a bit to the left. You don't really need the corner of the walkway in the picture and the kid is looking toward camera left. It's a minor point, but it's the kind of thing I sometimes lecture about: the need to internalize composition.

Hum... interesting. I did in fact make the exact opposite composition choice by cropping significantly the left part of the image for the very reason that I strongly dislike compositions where a person is looking towards the close edge of an image. ;)

But I do totally agree with the basic principle you are listing. But in the end I always prioritise the relationship between a persons "open side" and the far edge.

Cheers,
Bernard

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The little one
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2014, 09:30:49 am »

Well, I don't want to beat the point to death, Bernard. As I said earlier, it's a relatively small point. I love the picture in any case, and she's just plain beautiful. But since she's looking over her right shoulder I'd have put her closer to the right side of the frame. Can you lift the tone in her face with a little dodging?
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: The little one
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2014, 09:35:13 am »

Well, I don't want to beat the point to death, Bernard. As I said earlier, it's a relatively small point. I love the picture in any case, and she's just plain beautiful. But since she's looking over her right shoulder I'd have put her closer to the right side of the frame. Can you lift the tone in her face with a little dodging?

No offence taken Russ. Just discussing. :)

I see, I guess that to me the umbrella is the defining feature in terms of her "orientation", more so that the very slight left bound direction of her face. But I see your point.

Yes, I can definitely lighten her face a little bit.

Cheers,
Bernard

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The little one
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2014, 10:02:37 am »

Since you were using the D800 I guessed you could.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22813
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: The little one
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2014, 10:22:31 am »

I agree with lightening her face just a tad, but I feel the composition is just right as it is.
And when I first read Russ's first comment, I laughed aloud at the idea of directing a two-year-old.

Eric
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: The little one
« Reply #16 on: March 31, 2014, 10:26:03 am »

Ah hah! See. . . Sometimes we do disagree, Eric.

I'll have to admit though that since I don't know what was off to the left I'm taking a flying fling at a rolling doughnut.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

cjogo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1469
Re: The little one
« Reply #17 on: March 31, 2014, 01:03:19 pm »

Works perfectly ~!
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22813
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: The little one
« Reply #18 on: March 31, 2014, 03:30:49 pm »

Ah hah! See. . . Sometimes we do disagree, Eric.
We need to disagree at least once a month, just to keep the arteries flowing, Russ.   ;)
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)
Pages: [1]   Go Up