would you be happy as a client after these shots?

If not what would you suggest I change to make them good shots in both editing, lighting, composition to make them good shots?

shots where done with two speedlights. one setup even with camera for fill going through a shoot through umbrella, the other was off to camera right bounced into an umbrella.

1)

On your last question - no, I would not want a low saturation image, especially for a Christmas shot. There is just too much color involved in the Holiday. Not ruling out an exceptional B&W, but low saturation just doesn't look right to me.

As to your main question - it would depend a whole lot on how much I was being charged as a client.

#1 - I like this best, even with the cropped head (I know it's a style). Light looks good, smile is great, good use of DOF.

#2 - you lost eye contact and there appears to be a color cast to the image.

#3 - looks better but you still have that color cast - green? This would have looked really good with the same lighting and color as #1

#4 - you got the lighting back up with no cast that I can see. The pose is just too head on with shoulders square to the camera. Not flattering for a young lady.

And generally some more light on your background would have helped. Did you shoot a white balance? If not, you should. And if you don't shoot a white balance don't use AWB. Pick flash or daylight at least.

The first one is the best, exposure and color-wise but the tree looks like it was turned off or has no lights (maybe it was/doesn't but in my area we have lights on our trees and I like to see them).

The rest are off in various ways. Are you using E-TTL with AWB?

With the color cast I admit easily could be a problem. To me the first one looks like it has the most cast to it that I'm just now picking up wish seems to be a magenta tint to it, the rest though seem to be fairly close.There is a bad mixture of my eye's aren't very good at detecting it mixed with an uncalibrated monitor with a very narrow viewing angle. There was no white balance set before hand and I admit fault on that one. I haven't done any kind of planned shot like this in a while or many times for that matter and so I do not have much of a workflow setup yet and did not do that step. Usually I just try to fix white balance in post but with the above sentance I admit that I shouldn't leave it up to my eyes to fix later on. Guess it is finally time to get myself a monitor calibration device and one of those passport color checkers.

2) The loss of eye contact was done with intent to be that way. If I was to do a shot like this again how could it be done without her looking at the camera? Have what she is looking at visible, just not an extreme tilt like that or don't bother trying?


4) My wife, she doesn't like pictures taken and so I had to make it quick simple and easy for her to get the picture and get her away from the front of the camera . Any advice for handling that kind of situation?
With the background being dark I'll take credit for that as well with being intentional. I did have more light on the background then what is being shown here, but for some reason usually like the dark high contrast backgrounds. Looking at these pictures though I do see your point though with how the shadows could of happened without being crushed so far into black.

Looking at these now I'm also seeing issues with hair that I didn't catch before (call me blind) where it has stray hairs going wild.


CDI I honestly don't believe the tree has lights on it. If it does I haven't seen them turned on yet (mother in laws house) and so I didn't think of turning them on.
I was using manual flash with no E-TTL. I do believe it was set to AWB though.
Would you mind me asking what other issues you are noticing with the shots?

Ah okay. Some trees don't have lights. It's just odd, IMHO. I actually like a subtle desaturation because it can be classy when hit right on.

The "various ways" really just meant inconsistent exposure and white balance among the shots. The first one looks closest to "right" on my screen. The others vary between too dark, too light, too green, and too red. Since you weren't E-TTL I don't know what caused your exposure variance (perhaps not waiting on the lights to fully recycle?) but a custom or color temp setting on the camera works best for accurate, consistent color. I leave my cameras on 5500K all the time and it's pretty much always right on since I'm usually shooting in broad daylight or using the speedlites in umbrellas.

First off, I'm not a fan of cropped heads. Don't know if that's a 'trend' or a 'flavor of the month', but I just don't care for it.

1.) As previously stated, probably the best-composed and exposed image. Not sure if his smile is a bit forced because he was 'forced' to pose (let's face it, how many teenage boys like to pose? ), but his eyes are almost shut. Maybe its just the way he is...not much you can do about it.

2.) Cute girl, cute pic. Positioning her more to the right side of the frame may have been a better composition since she's looking camera left. Also, a reflector for fill could have been used to remove the shadows from her face on camera left. I'd also fix the catchlight in her right eye.

3.) Check your white balance (looks like a slight green? colorcast), and maybe a bit underexposed. Also, a re-directed hair light would have helped to separate her hair from the background. Again, a reflector could have helped with lighting the right side of her face. Nice composition though (except for the aforementioned head crop).

4.) Dead center, looking directly into the camera. This pose is typical of a mugshot and should be avoided. The focus and lighting is very good (although a slight warm spot on her camera right forehead), but the pose is a no-no.

Generally OK shots. I think the fill umbrella should have been closer to them, or bigger than it was. I really don't care for harsh shadows for kids.

PhotosGuy I think this is the first time I have seen you post something other then links to other pages in the POTN site that explain how to do something. I was a bit limited for space without moving about their whole living room. the umbrella was sitting right up against the edge of the couch as close to them as I could get it. was originally going to use as a bounce but had the same ideas as you in wanting something softer and so I changed it to a shoot through. Both umbrellas are about 40-45" or so I believe. The key could of been brought in closer I do know that. I had it setup for when I was trying to shoot a group pose of them and was pulled it back a bit to try to prevent light falloff on the far face and never changed it when we went into single shots.

Thank you everyone for the advice. Editing isn't my strong point by far, for that matter even taking pictures isn't a strong point for me but it is a hobby I do enjoy and want to work my way to get a couple bucks from it to hopefully recoup atleast a portion of my cost. Would make it easier to buy more gear and would also make the wife happy, and a happy wife is always better . I think a mixture of doing more editing, and a better workflow would help out loads with getting more consistant though.

With the boys headshot all of them had his eyes closed like that. Argyle you nailed it though, he doesn't like having his picture taken.


here are some retouches though on two of the above pictures.

The retouches are much better...

The answer for me is no ... but please don't take that as a stop sign to your career. The light and lens color palette are not working for me. Great light captured in its purest form is the start of a great image. A great composition is right there as well.

Please continue the work of refining your art. A tedious process but one with great rewards.

I'm seeing that now. Don't ask but for some reason the nice dark look to me looked better at first but now that I played with it a bit it seems lighter is the way to go.

How would one though get that nice dark high contrast look without it looking so overdone as it seems the first set had? With the nice dark, rich colors kind of like the good ol' days had christmas pictures as rather then this bright fancy stuff they seem to do anymore? The look that you seem to get in many of the old paintings.

Painters have far more control over light than we do for the most part. They also work on light a day at a time and it never changes. Only in a studio setting do we get the same kind of control. The art of photography is really deep and there is no easy way to get what you want from it. The beast will tame as it has for a hundred years or more. At some point you will find something that gives you satisfaction and that is a path to a personal vision.

rx7speed:

You've heard about the colorcast and the inconsistent WB across the shots. If it's not too late, ask for a WhiBal card for Christmas! The more I use mine, the more essential it's becoming in getting good consistent WB across shots in a similar setting.

Shoot the WhiBal card first then take your pics. Correct WB using the WhiBal card image for all shots taken at the location of the WhiBal card. Great and inexpensive tool.

dave

the first one is my favorite but i agree that the lights on the tree should be on and i'd prefer even more light on his face. i would've moved the light to left and slightly above on the 2nd one and had her maybe looking up at an ornament or reaching out to touch it and would've cropped it where she was on the right of the frame looking to the left...again with the third i would've moved the light to the other side and had her sitting up a bit more straight with a slight tilt to her head or resting on her knees with a tighter crop and the last one i would've angled her body a bit the straight on shot isn't working for me...she needs to be shot from above a bit with an angle...imo.

Tank you all for your help I'll see maybe if I can borrow my daughter, sister in law, wife, and the mother in laws tree one more time and try a reshoot with some of your ideas.

snyderman I plan on getting a white balance thing soon here and was aiming for the passport colorchecker by xrite I think it is as I've heard that has some cool things with it to profile the whole camera colors on top of just white balance. Granted little more then just a white balance card but might be worth it as long as the results stack up.

erinavery moving the light to the other side was a no-go. couch was in the way and it would cause me to move around mroe stuff in their house that I was unwilling/unable to do. The snap that I did post was about the best I was able to get with her short 2 year old attention span . Then again I should of known better also to try to get all the pictures done at one time and instead spread them out and put her in every couple shots to try to get something. With my wife it all depends on how willing she is to get in front of the camera again, but I'll try atleast.

Again thank you all and if I can get to do a reshoot I'll post them up here to get some more pointers.