A few from a family/baby portrait job this morning!

[Geoff]

ok...you were warned..if you're not into baby photos, don't look!
I had an AWESOME weekend with 3 jobs, two of them down at Balmoral Beach. The sky for this morning's shoot was PERFECT...nice high cloud, acting as a massive big soft box. Here's four quickly edited from the shoot this morning. It's been quite some time since I've posted an image or two:









And this one from a shoot a few weeks ago (yep, it's 5 images...ummm aaaaa):

[inmotion]

HI Geoff, #1 and 2 dont do any thing for me at all, I think the 2nd needs dads face with the baby not facing away?.#1 may come to life if the baby was reaching for a shell maybee.The last is a great shot but I think in this pose the child and adult need to look in the same direction-was there a distraction?#3 and 4 are great IMO.I am not shore if you took several shots of the young son with dad as every thing else works for me, it would also look good if the child was looking at dad or both at each other. Cheers JIm

[Geoff]

Thanks for the constructive comments Jim.
When shooting babies of this age (4 months) and two parents, you have to shoot as you go, so 'posing' isn't always ideal. I absolutely take on board your comments. The parents have already seen these few and are suitably very pleased, so at the end of the day that makes me a happy camper!
If I could pose a 4 month old to the 'perfect' position I'd be a VERY rich man, either that OR I need to become a photoshop master, of which I'm not.
I think photography is a never ending learning curve and of course there's things you could/should/would do better 'next time', but with young babies/kids shoots it's the spur of the moment that often turns out to be the 'capture'.

With the last shot, the distraction was more than likely Mum, and they (the parents know that) - so to them the image is a winner.

Thanks again though for your comments!

[surenj]

Geoff these are brilliant. I especially like the the 4th. Is the pinky colour cast intentional?



How much time did you have with them?

Re: posing young children, I wonder how Anne Geddes does it? They must take hours and hours to get a shot I think.

[gstark]

Geoff,

Degree of difficulty: 10.

The first image almost works, because of the shallow DoF. The issues associated with shooting young children create difficulties in posing that those who have not yet attempted this type of shooting cannot even begin to imagine. That said, the second image is not really one of your best, and it has nothing to do with the difficulties that shooting kids presents.

The issue here is that you failed to scan the viewfinder before releasing the shutter, and in so doing, you didn't really see the image you were capturing in this one. You have free space behind the father's back, but only a half mother included in the image. Wb is good, but I'm concerned at the vignetting I see at the bottom of this image; that doesn't strike me as being right ...

The third is great; good use of shallow DoF, and a good conversion.

Were you using auto wb? The fourth is way too pink for my liking. I think even Pink would say too much.

The fifth is just a great image. Well done.

[ozimax]

It is true Geoff, shooting 4 month old kids is decidedly tricky. My first and only grandson is 4 months old. He smiles and laughs right up until you compose the shot and then he stops smiling. I've taken to shooting, literally, from the hip. That makes focussing very difficult. I think if you take enough shots you'll eventually get some you like. BTW, thanks for posting these images.

[Reschsmooth]

I've taken to shooting, literally, from the hip. That makes focussing very difficult.

Only because you are using the wrong gear - heard of a TLR or waist level finder (you may need to revert to a real camera).

I agree with much of what Gary said, and will say that, in the first image I think really works from the point of view that it shows a very young child absolutely focused on something minute which we, as adults, wouldn't even consider. The DoF amplifies this.

The 3rd, 4th & 5th shots are really good as well. The 2nd is the weakest of the lot, for reasons Gary has mentioned.

I appreciate all too well how difficult it is to capture those fleeting shots when a child is in the right 'pose'.

[ozimax]

(you may need to revert to a real camera).

I did have a real camera once, but I sold it to buy a Nikon.

[Geoff]

Thanks for your comments guys.
Gary - I probably over did the vignette in post on the 2nd image. The 4th one is more saturated, however her top was already pink and I personally dont' think I've over done it, but I have taken onboard the comments and do appreciate them from you's all.
As for white balance! AUTO? No sir, it was a beautiful cloudy morning, so I used CLOUDY WB

[gstark]

Gary - I probably over did the vignette in post on the 2nd image.

And you thought that I wouldn't notice, right?

The 4th one is more saturated, however her top was already pink and I personally dont' think I've over done it,

I have no issues accepting what you're saying, but I will draw your attention to the section of the towell that is under her left hand and shoulder. I'm looking at the area that is in the shadow: I would not expect this region to have a colour cast. A little of this might be a reflection from the pink clothing, but to me, there is some that is not displaying this reflection and that is where I'm forming my judgement.

That said, these are your images, and for your client. If the client is happy, then that is the desired outcome, and my comments are worth precisely what you have paid for them.

[DebT]

You've done well catching happy relaxing moments - especially love the b&w - might be a bit cliche to some ..but parents love them and it's all about pleasing them and providing something they couldn't do themselves.
I have young grand kids so know how difficult it can be.
DebT