Senior session

I shoot for fun. So far just sessions for family and friends. Wife's cousin asked if I could take some senior photos. Here's the result.

Love to hear your thoughts on what I could do better.

I like them! only nitpick would be a little bit more light on those beautiful eyeson No. 2

Yeah, agreed. I need to get better with using flash. It kinda scares me though at the moment.

These aren't bad at all but with slightly better lighting and given a bit more of a pop with the processing these could be a lot better.

I'd also remove the blemish between her eyes in the 2nd photo. It doesn't seem to be visible in the other photos so I'd remove it.

I think they look pretty good too.

Maybe a smile now and again......?

Ditto on what others have said.

As Roberto Valenzuela says. To make the person the subject of an image, they need to be at least 2 of these 3 things (3 being best when possible).

The biggest, the brightest or what is in focus.

Nice job on the set. I do have one question, why are all the photograph in landscape orientation. The first two can very easily be done in portrait and would help accentuate the subject of the photograph. If that is her front lawn fence, then that might be something for a remembrance, but if not, does it need to be there?

For ME, I always felt that a photograph should have a subject and the rest needing to support that subject? Does an automobile on the street improve the subject or relate to that subject?

Recently watching some of Jay Maisel's videos, he always talks about good cropping, not composition, as being what is left out of the photograph to distract the viewer. He concentrates on the subject and tries to make the corners not ruin a photograph.

Another way of looking at this, is the smaller the person is in the frame the better they can hide in the photograph.

Bob

BlackBull wrote in post #18422959
These aren't bad at all but with slightly better lighting and given a bit more of a pop with the processing these could be a lot better.

I'd also remove the blemish between her eyes in the 2nd photo. It doesn't seem to be visible in the other photos so I'd remove it.

Thanks! Yeah, it was a cloudy morning so not much light and I'm still a little nervous about using a flash. Just not much experience with it.

Anything specifically you'd do in post to make them pop? I'm always afraid of overdoing the post processing so I try to keep it at a minimum aside from some sharpening, white balance, and levels adjustments.

The blemish is actually just a mole which I didn't remove in the others, so I'm not sure why it's not visible? lol. Maybe the lighting hide it or something. Since it's not technically a blemish, I didn't think it would be right to remove it? Knowing it's a mole, would you still remove it?

Thanks!

saea501 wrote in post #18422976
I think they look pretty good too.

Maybe a smile now and again......?

Yeah... It's my wife's cousin, she told her she needed to smile more after looking through the pics. I promise I did get some of her smiling. Just so happened that the best ones she wasn't. Here's a couple of her smiling just to prove I did get some!

Micro5797 wrote in post #18423333
Ditto on what others have said.

As Roberto Valenzuela says. To make the person the subject of an image, they need to be at least 2 of these 3 things (3 being best when possible).

The biggest, the brightest or what is in focus.

Thanks! Are you saying I could do better here or that I've accomplished the goal? I think I've got two of three at least?

BigFilm wrote in post #18423552
Nice job on the set. I do have one question, why are all the photograph in landscape orientation. The first two can very easily be done in portrait and would help accentuate the subject of the photograph. If that is her front lawn fence, then that might be something for a remembrance, but if not, does it need to be there?

For ME, I always felt that a photograph should have a subject and the rest needing to support that subject? Does an automobile on the street improve the subject or relate to that subject?

Recently watching some of Jay Maisel's videos, he always talks about good cropping, not composition, as being what is left out of the photograph to distract the viewer. He concentrates on the subject and tries to make the corners not ruin a photograph.

Another way of looking at this, is the smaller the person is in the frame the better they can hide in the photograph.

Bob

Thanks, Bob. You're definitely right. I have no excuse for all landscape except I think that's just my inexperience showing. I guess I forget to turn the camera sometimes. I did capture the first one in portrait, but for whatever reason didn't like it quite as much as the one in landscape. Seems like there was something weird with the pose in those. Do you think I could crop those to be portrait and they'd be okay or would you avoid doing that?

The automobile in the one photo sucks, unfortunately. Streets are usually clear in that area and that day they weren't. I guess that's probably another one where I should have been more aware of the surroundings and took a few in portrait mode to avoid having the vehicle in there?

"Another way of looking at this, is the smaller the person is in the frame the better they can hide in the photograph."

I'm not sure I follow on that? If I were to take these exact same photos over again, i.e., same poses, etc., are you saying you'd recommend the subject being smaller in the frame?

Thanks!

Sorry about not getting back, got busy at work and forgot about it.

As for make a portrait out of a landscape, YOU can definitely do that for yourself. Make 5x7 prints in both landscape and portrait and compare them. This will get you a better idea of what the two can look like. But don't forget about using a square format. One of the second set that you posted would be great as a square. That should be definitely done, if it is only sent as a digital only. As for changing from portrait to landscape for a large print, the only way is to print the largest crop that you change and see if you feel that is good enough quality. If not, don't worry about it. Keep print quality as high as you feel is needed.

As for the smaller in frame, I would not do that. You did a very good job of keeping the subject large. I was trying to refer to what you might see with other photos. The closest that you got was with the sunset pictures and tries to make her on one third and the sunset on the other third. Sorry if I confused you on that.

Bob

Is there an echo in the room??!! lol. I concur with most everyone else that these are all good shots, but could use a lil more "pop" that could be provided by lighting. As for her smiling, IMO #3 and #4 of the last set you posted are the best of both sets. She's a beautiful young lady and you've done a good job. A slight levels and curves adjustment could get you some of the pop that you've missed by not using flash. But again, that's JMO. Keep snapping!!

BigFilm wrote in post #18425940
Sorry about not getting back, got busy at work and forgot about it.

As for make a portrait out of a landscape, YOU can definitely do that for yourself. Make 5x7 prints in both landscape and portrait and compare them. This will get you a better idea of what the two can look like. But don't forget about using a square format. One of the second set that you posted would be great as a square. That should be definitely done, if it is only sent as a digital only. As for changing from portrait to landscape for a large print, the only way is to print the largest crop that you change and see if you feel that is good enough quality. If not, don't worry about it. Keep print quality as high as you feel is needed.

As for the smaller in frame, I would not do that. You did a very good job of keeping the subject large. I was trying to refer to what you might see with other photos. The closest that you got was with the sunset pictures and tries to make her on one third and the sunset on the other third. Sorry if I confused you on that.

Bob

Thanks, Bob. That makes sense.

rowdy wrote in post #18427616
Is there an echo in the room??!! lol. I concur with most everyone else that these are all good shots, but could use a lil more "pop" that could be provided by lighting. As for her smiling, IMO #3 and #4 of the last set you posted are the best of both sets. She's a beautiful young lady and you've done a good job. A slight levels and curves adjustment could get you some of the pop that you've missed by not using flash. But again, that's JMO. Keep snapping!!

Thanks for your thoughts. I always find it interesting which photos others think are the best in a set. I felt like #1 in the first set and #1 in the second set posted were definitely the best two that I took. I like the ones you like too, just not quite as much. Love hearing other's thoughts on it though.; everyone has different tastes.