If only.....the baby's eyes were open or looking upward. ~sigh~
Next time, eh? 
Sep 21, 2006 14:27 | #1 If only.....the baby's eyes were open or looking upward. ~sigh~ Tony
LOG IN TO REPLY |
PaulTinworth Senior Member 945 posts Joined Apr 2006 Location: Cardiff, Wales (UK) More info | Sep 21, 2006 14:29 | #2 I love #2. To me, it screams out for the title of 'Innocence'. ~ Paul
LOG IN TO REPLY |
incendy Goldmember 2,118 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: Orange County More info | Sep 21, 2006 14:36 | #3 I also love the second one! The tree on the left kind of bothers me, but otherwise it is beautiful! Canon 5d with 35mm 1.4L, 24-70mm 2.8L and 135mm 2.0L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Rhinotherunt Looking for a Rock 7,129 posts Likes: 2 Joined Jun 2006 Location: Jasper, AL More info | Sep 21, 2006 15:57 | #4 I like the second one. The tree does not bother me. Ryan McGill
LOG IN TO REPLY |
PhotoScout Senior Member 887 posts Joined Jun 2006 Location: California More info | If the tree wasn't there then the swing would look out of place (like not complimented or connected with). 5D * 20D * XHA1S * HF11
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 21, 2006 18:01 | #6 PhotoScout wrote in post #2019074 If the tree wasn't there then the swing would look out of place (like not complimented or connected with). The area looks beautiful. Great place to shoot. I agree totally .. .great capture.. it is real Hansel and Gretal. lol
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 21, 2006 22:56 | #7 If the tree wasn't there then the swing would look out of place (like not complimented or connected with). Tony
LOG IN TO REPLY |
incendy Goldmember 2,118 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: Orange County More info | Sep 21, 2006 23:11 | #8 PhotoScout wrote in post #2019074 If the tree wasn't there then the swing would look out of place (like not complimented or connected with). The area looks beautiful. Great place to shoot. Yeah, I suppose so. In this scene I would think there is enough to support it's place that it isn't necessary. That is just my thought though because I don't think it adds to the photo and my eye was drawn to it first thing. Either way it is dreamy and since I am in the minority I am most likely wrong as usual Canon 5d with 35mm 1.4L, 24-70mm 2.8L and 135mm 2.0L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 21, 2006 23:29 | #9 "and since I am in the minority I am most likely wrong " Tony
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 21, 2006 23:35 | #10 For the first one. As pointed by the OP, had the little one's face been pointed a bit more towards the camera, it would have turned out to be an excellent photo (very nice still though, specially for parents). --Mario
LOG IN TO REPLY |
WxGuesser Senior Member 630 posts Joined Jul 2006 Location: Vacaville, Ca More info | Sep 21, 2006 23:36 | #11 are they your kids? I've never taken pics of random people at a park.. but i think i'd feel somewhat creepy doing that! espically young kids in a wooded park! Canon 350D | EF 17-40 f4 L | EF 50 f1.8 | "Kit Lens" | EF 70-200 f2.8 L on order | Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro | EF 1.4x II L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 21, 2006 23:38 | #12 Oh...well, they were not my kids, but their mom works with my wife and asked me to do a shoot. The family owns a place further out in the country...holds some special memories for her so she wanted some pics of her kids out there as well. Tony
LOG IN TO REPLY |
WxGuesser Senior Member 630 posts Joined Jul 2006 Location: Vacaville, Ca More info | Sep 21, 2006 23:41 | #13 thank goodness.... and btw.. for some reason i like the 2nd pic best.. seems to have a story to it. Canon 350D | EF 17-40 f4 L | EF 50 f1.8 | "Kit Lens" | EF 70-200 f2.8 L on order | Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro | EF 1.4x II L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
incendy Goldmember 2,118 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: Orange County More info | Sep 21, 2006 23:57 | #14 Here is a crop just for sake of the conversation. Please ignore the noise and color I just pasted it into an image I was working on and was too lazy to delete the layers, but hope this crop shows my point of view better than my words. I still prefer the original crop, but feel the swing could stand on its own just fine
Canon 5d with 35mm 1.4L, 24-70mm 2.8L and 135mm 2.0L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Wildewinds Senior Member 397 posts Joined Apr 2005 Location: Southern California More info | Sep 22, 2006 01:51 | #15 #2 is very nice. Good job. - 20D - Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 - Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 -
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2704 guests, 160 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||