DSLRUsers.com

What happens when a 7 month old decides a lens is a plaything

(The joys of a MF lens when you can't look through the viewfinder)

Patrick,

Have you tried any alternate crops with these two images?

I think both would look great cropped square.

For the first, crop from a little bit below the hand - probably keep some, but not all, of the chin - and also crop a nudge off the top, to make it square. Keep all of the hand, but you want to emphasise how the hand is framing the face.

For the second, again use the hand to frame the image: crop above the thumb that's obscuring the FoV (eliminate the upper section of the image) and use that as your guide to keeping a square section of the lower part of the image. The expression in this image is superb, and I think that by cropping, you will help to draw the viewer's atention back in on this.

I love the first one Patrick.

My 18 month old loves the camera, she comes running everytime I get it out.
I have many of these types shots, often followed by 5 minutes cleaning the UV filter. But it's all worth it.

Cheers.

Thanks for the feedback, Gary & Warwick.

Gary, I have adopted your square crop suggestions. Are these what you had in mind? (I think your suggestion of a square crop is spot on - 6x6 all the way).

Yep, square works really well.

I'm always amazed when playing in Lightroom just how much difference the different crops make.

Patrick,

Reschsmooth wrote:Gary, I have adopted your square crop suggestions. Are these what you had in mind? (I think your suggestion of a square crop is spot on - 6x6 all the way).

Exactly.

I think that these are just A1 now: you have natural framing within the image from the hand that's partially obscuring the lens, but as you already observed, the partial obscuring helps to add a point of focus to the image. You've now eliminate those parts of the image that are outside of the framing, and I think the results are very worthy: print big and hang on the wall.

FWIW, the images are soft, to the point of being out of focus, but I think that is a part of the charm of these. I don't think these would look half as good were the focus pin-sharp.

gstark wrote:FWIW, the images are soft, to the point of being out of focus, but I think that is a part of the charm of these. I don't think these would look half as good were the focus pin-sharp.

That's right, Gary. They are out of focus as I had to rely on manual focus and, even to that extent, had to rely on the distance markers on the lens barrel as I couldn't get my eye to the viewfinder. I agree with your comment that the OOF element adds to the obscure charm of these.

great stuff...... the look in the second is fantastic and should be framed, the softness adds to the look....... sticky fingers on the lens is another issue

I have been looking at these pics for the past couple of days trying to understand why they were posted.

OK, I’m a father too and I can understand the joy of a child and what they can bring into your life. But to me these pics are badly composed and have no credibility that deserve any critique as to method and purpose. They are pics that should reside in the family album and nowhere else.

Sorry Patrick but you can do, and have done, better than this.

Chris,
I appreciate what you are saying..absolutely... but do you not also agree with what Gary has said? They aren't technically great but are worthy (more than JUST the family album?). Does a photo have to be techincally perfect before it can be shown to a wider audience than only family/friends? Be keen to hear your thoughts on this cos I respect you as a friend and photographer

sirhc55 wrote:I have been looking at these pics for the past couple of days trying to understand why they were posted.

OK, I’m a father too and I can understand the joy of a child and what they can bring into your life. But to me these pics are badly composed and have no credibility that deserve any critique as to method and purpose. They are pics that should reside in the family album and nowhere else.

Sorry Patrick but you can do, and have done, better than this.

Hi Chris

You have raised two valid, distinct yet linked questions:

1. Are the photos of a good technical quality?
2. Are they worth posting here or anywhere in the public domain?

To answer the first - no they are not. They are out of focus and, as you said, of questionable compositional quality (hence Gary's comments suggesting a different crop). They are images of Alex's inquisitiveness captured within a technically challenged environment - I could not look through the viewfinder and hence composition and focus were guessed (the lens used could only be used in manual focus mode, as previously stated). But the technical qualities, or lack of them, is not what drew me to these images. I took about 10 or so at the time, and the rest will probably go to the recycle bin as the moment captured does not compensate sufficiently the poor technical qualities of the image.

The second is an interesting question. I posted the images in the Image Reviews and Critiques thread which obviously implied that I was seeking critical appraisal from forum members. As I alluded to above, this was not the case as I was sharing the images - hence, your question is justified to the extent that probably placed the images in the wrong thread (perhaps they should have been in the Humour or Gallery threads?). However, the fact that I was provided excellent feedback which helped, in my opinion, to improve the images, was very welcome.

But I believe your question goes further - should they have been posted in a public domain for those beyond family to view? First, I will say that if everyone considered the appropriateness of the content they post on the internet and acted on those considerations, 99.9% of blogs and the Daily Telegraph online wouldn't exist . Seriously, ignoring the appropriateness of the thread in which they were posted, I simply posted the images to share a humourous moment between Alex & I with other people. A more specific title would have aided others in determining whether to spend the short amount of time spent viewing them.

I trust I haven't come across as defensive?

Cheers

Reschsmooth wrote:
Hi Chris

You have raised two valid, distinct yet linked questions:

1. Are the photos of a good technical quality?
2. Are they worth posting here or anywhere in the public domain?

To answer the first - no they are not. They are out of focus and, as you said, of questionable compositional quality (hence Gary's comments suggesting a different crop). They are images of Alex's inquisitiveness captured within a technically challenged environment - I could not look through the viewfinder and hence composition and focus were guessed (the lens used could only be used in manual focus mode, as previously stated). But the technical qualities, or lack of them, is not what drew me to these images. I took about 10 or so at the time, and the rest will probably go to the recycle bin as the moment captured does not compensate sufficiently the poor technical qualities of the image.

The second is an interesting question. I posted the images in the Image Reviews and Critiques thread which obviously implied that I was seeking critical appraisal from forum members. As I alluded to above, this was not the case as I was sharing the images - hence, your question is justified to the extent that probably placed the images in the wrong thread (perhaps they should have been in the Humour or Gallery threads?). However, the fact that I was provided excellent feedback which helped, in my opinion, to improve the images, was very welcome.

But I believe your question goes further - should they have been posted in a public domain for those beyond family to view? First, I will say that if everyone considered the appropriateness of the content they post on the internet and acted on those considerations, 99.9% of blogs and the Daily Telegraph online wouldn't exist . Seriously, ignoring the appropriateness of the thread in which they were posted, I simply posted the images to share a humourous moment between Alex & I with other people. A more specific title would have aided others in determining whether to spend the short amount of time spent viewing them.

I trust I haven't come across as defensive?

Cheers

Patrick, a lucid description of your purpose which has no defensive content, as I hope my own post was not viewed as offensive.

Maybe I was being too pedantic with regard to the images, but I based my comments on a critique scenario and without making any constructive comments made a rather blunt comment. Under normal circumstance, if a member posts a pic of a child that is not their own, the comments posted are not biased. But when it is a child of the member there tends to be a more reserved approach to making any comments that could be seen as offensive.

I have no problem at all with pics of children (I have posted some myself) and to enforce my point I just loved the pic that Owen posted recently.

In the end it comes down to every individuals approach to viewing any image and as I said, this image is one for the family album because it will bring joy to both of you in the years to come.

Pax

Chris, I took no offence at your comments, particularly those regarding the critique of the photos, and, to an extent, agree with them. And, yes, my frame of reference when viewing them will be biased by the emotional aspect of them, and, perhaps, others may be less inclined to provide negative criticism of a photo of one's child than a photo of a car, bird or bird However, I don't believe people would give positive comments just to avoid potentially being 'offensive', but would, instead, just not provide any feedback - I trust that makes sense?

That said, I don't necessarily agree with your comments regarding the appropriateness of posting the images in a public domain, although perhaps DSLRUsers may not be the place to post images for which critical feedback is not sought? However, this is the forum where people can and do politely choose to disagree without getting offensive or defensive.

Personally I love them.. they are right up my alley.. and yeah yeah I know that compostionally and technically they are suposed to be 'bad shots'.. but sometimes its no about that.. sometimes its about art... and art has no rules.. if its pleasing to the eye then its good.. and sure it may not be pleasing to everyones eye but thats the beauty of photography... I would be enlarging and framing the mono..