Portrait

[danielchtong]

See what you think.
If there is problem with the link, let me know
http://jjj.image.pbase.com/u14/danieltong/upload/4109621.IMG_2316Danielle.JPG
Daniel
Toronto

[Conk]

Yepp'er! There's a problem with the link.

[danielchtong]

http://www.pbase.com/danieltong

Sorry. I hope this one is ok.

Daniel

[slejhamer]

Daniel,
Adorable little girl. Yours? It's always great to have a spontaneous shot turn out to be a keeper.
Exposure on the face is very nice. The only negative I can see is the background, but that's not always something you can control. :)

Cheers,

[Leighow]

DAN

It is a beautiful shot. Such a quietly happy and comfortable girl. A beauty.

I do not see any red eye here, but I wonder about the white eye spots.

Other thn that it is beautiful. Congratulaitons.

HOWIE

[Conk]

Very cute. A heartbreaker in the making.

[eland]

Daniel

This is an excellent portrait of the little girl, more so
as your light source is flash apparently close to the camera and seemingly undiffused.

So full marks for the interpretation of the child's face.
Lovely expression.

Many pics fail because of lack of attention to
background and this image needs some simple help
on the computer.

1. I would remove the bar of light both sides of her head. It is spoiling a good portrait.

2. As there is no detail of the top of her head and it just
blends into the darkness, I would crop the image just
above the lighted area of her hair. Leave a strip of dark.
This would also remove the distracting light top right.

3. To re-balance the photo I would then crop off
some of the base of the image. Perhaps to the top of
her shoulder.

Neglecting backgrounds and details generally
can ruin otherwise excellent photographs.

eland

[danielchtong]

You are right on the source of light. It was taken in a hurry that I did not have time to pop my 420 into the hotshoe. So I just used the GI built-in light.

Turned out to be a keeper. I have done the PS touch-up as you suggested. Thanks

Daniel
Toronto

[mrchips]

Fellow photographers,

FYI

I ocassionally see pictures of people on this forum. I think we should all remember that we CAN NOT publish a picture in print, on the web, etc etc without a model release. I doubt this holds for sons, daughters, wives, etc. This is especially true of children where you need the signed permission of the childs parents to "Publish" the picture.

It takes a little extra time to get this signed but the day we take that perfect picture that someone actually wants to spend money to purchase from us we better have that release.

Just a thought
Denny

[iDan]

mrchips wrote:
I think we should all remember that we CAN NOT publish a picture in print, on the web, etc etc without a model release. I doubt this holds for sons, daughters, wives, etc. This is especially true of children where you need the signed permission of the childs parents to "Publish" the picture.
Denny

I think it's not a «universal» rule.

iDan