If it weren't for the softness that would be a very nice portrait. There's something about the softness of the image that just doesn't look intentional. Camera shake maybe?
This is a great picture of your son. good job. I like his exspression.
Originally posted by TerryGee: I like the first one much better. I would really try to get rid of the two heavy branches on the top right and center left. They are very distracting. I had done this one of my son. Is the focus too soft? It was inside, not enough natural lighting.
Well, this proves what I always suspected... I know nothing :)
I like the softer (second) version best... To me, it gives a slight, dreamstate quality. The downside to the softness is the "smile lines" fade almost to being gone. The pose looks a little unnatural/forced, but that's understandable. It's hard to get young folks to understand "Pose, but don't look like your posing" :)
TerryGee, I wouldn't change a thing... I think you nailed it!
On the point of the eyes looking unsharp in the soft focus shot. You can have the eyes sharper my applying a mask to the blurred layer and then allow the sharp layer to show through. This a way of making the skin appear smooth without losing the appearance of sharpness. It is an extension of the principal that you only get one bit of a portrait sharp make sure it is the eyes. (The windows to the soul)
Originally posted by TerryGee: I like the first one much better. I would really try to get rid of the two heavy branches on the top right and center left. They are very distracting. I had done this one of my son. Is the focus too soft? It was inside, not enough natural lighting.
I really like the shot of your son - especially the soft focus. It's a very sweet photo. (But better not tell him someone called it "sweet"!) Linda
I like the first shot John, but the technique you used on the second is pretty slick. I take very few formal pics, but I took this shot to commemerate the purchase of my sons first skateboard. I ended up submitting it to Digital Photographers magazine and it made it into the Sept 2002 readers gallery. Check it if you like..
Originally posted by TerryGee: I had done this one of my son. Is the focus too soft? It was inside, not enough natural lighting.
That's a fine portrait. Print it. You've compensated for any lighting problems, and the degree of softness is just right (at least on my monitor!). If you want to "mess with it," I'd try masking it so just the hair gets sharpened a little, but leave the rest alone. That should reinforce the feeling that the photo is "in focus" and make the softness seem natural.
Thanks for the info, love photoshop techniques, made this one from your comments wadda think? I have a 9 year old and grandma wanted pics too this digital stuff is so much easier than taking slides and blowing the up (cheaper too)
Decided against paying for school portraits... wanted to do them myself. I know the one of my son is overexposed, but he is a tricky and uncooperative little guy, so I got what I could of him. ;0) I will try with him again.. I was really out for a portrait of them together... What do you think?
Originally posted by Karen Bryan: Nice portraits everyone! May I join the fun? :0)
Decided against paying for school portraits... wanted to do them myself. I know the one of my son is overexposed, but he is a tricky and uncooperative little guy, so I got what I could of him. ;0) I will try with him again.. I was really out for a portrait of them together... What do you think?
