Tried some portrait pictures this weekend...

[pozey]

I took my daughter to the park this weekend to try to take some portraits of her. The setting was beautiful and my daughter looked beautiful. Unfortunately, she was more interested in playing than modeling.

Anyway, I think I took a few pictures that were decent.

Let me know what you think.......good, bad, or otherwise. I will take any comments and take her out again and try some more. Be honest.

 

[handicap18]

That 3rd picture is excellent. She looks like she was having fun. Great job.

 

[RadioNate]

That 3rd picture is excellent. She looks like she was having fun. Great job.

I agree - really lovely. I like the 1st one also but think it would have more of an impact if she wasn't square to the camera. Try her sitting her at an angle or angleing the camera.

 

[MICKEY88]

all are nice, first shot, throwing background out of focus would make it better, eyes should be drawn to the subject not distracted by the background,,,


vertical almost always works best for portraits...

looks like you have a fun model to work with....

 

[jenny2]

Great pictures!! She's adorable

Maybe next time shoot for an overcast day so the shadows won't be as harsh on her face? And I agree about the depth of field for the first shot. The flowers are pretty, but you want your beautiful daughter to stand out against them so she should be in focus, not them.

 

[jann1033]

number 3 is my favorite...i just saw a program on fthe fine living channel about taking portraits of kids..i think this is similar info

http://www.fineliving.com/fine/rejuvenation_essentials/article/0,1663,FINE_1422_1613424,00.html

i think #4 would be a little cuter with more of her face ( that expression says it all ) and less of the dress and surroundings ( like maybe the shoulders and head). would a fill flash have helped get rid of some of the shadows on her face in that one?

 

[Anewman]

GREAT PICTURES.

Compisiton wise the last picture is best IMO.

Ligting wise number three is best, no shadows over/on the face. others could use some fill flash or other reflected light.

overall I like the last picture best, could improve lighting/exposure but still the best use of the model.

IMO.

 

[Dan Murphy]

Gorgeous pictures, so cute. What camera/settings???

 

[pozey]

Gorgeous pictures, so cute. What camera/settings???

Camera is a Canon Digital Rebel XT.

Lens was a Tamron 28-300. I have had the lens for quite some time. I need to get a better lens more suited for portraits. Suggestions for such a lens? What would be my best bet for under $300?


And jann.....thanks for the link....

 

[Anewman]

The canon 50mm F1.8 can be a great portrait lens, and it runs about $85.

I do mostly SPORTS shooting but here is a few examples with that lens, snapshots with no setup.

 

[manning]

Try two things

Put subject into the shade or shoot on an overcast day. This gives you even lighting and eliminates the squinting.

Also use fill in flash.

 

[captaincrash]

Anewman...

Do you have the Mk 1 or 2? I was thinking about getting one of these "affordable" 50mm 1.8 "wonder lenses"... but I've read a few posts of the Mk 2 being incredibly fragile. And it seems tough to find a k 1 at a fair price (eBay or otherwise). And the f1.4 does not seem worth the extra expense to me from the results on photozone.

If you have the mk2 - have you ever felt this was fragile? Sae Q goes for anyone else reading this who owns a 50mm f1.8 Mk 1 or 2; and the f1.4. Any comments would be appreciated.

Cheers,

Tom

And just for good measure - here are a couple of casual portraits of my little girls...

 

[Anewman]

Anewman...

Do you have the Mk 1 or 2? I was thinking about getting one of these "affordable" 50mm 1.8 "wonder lenses"... but I've read a few posts of the Mk 2 being incredibly fragile. And it seems tough to find a k 1 at a fair price (eBay or otherwise). And the f1.4 does not seem worth the extra expense to me from the results on photozone.

If you have the mk2 - have you ever felt this was fragile? Sae Q goes for anyone else reading this who owns a 50mm f1.8 Mk 1 or 2; and the f1.4. Any comments would be appreciated.

I own the MK II which is ALL PLASTIC even the mount.

As lenses go I would put it right around the build quality as the 18-55mm Kit lens that came with the original Digital Rebel, cept this has no zoom so to some it may feel a bit better. When mounted on the camera I feels better than when the lens is loose, when loose if feels like a feather.

Even though it is a lens that I dont shoot with very much, since I am not much of a portrait shooter. But it is always in my bag or glove box, more than I can say about any other of my lenses. I have owned it since about december of 2004 and it still looks and shoots like new. If it broke today I would still feel I got more than my moneys worth.

So to finally answer your question.
Yes it feels fragile. But I know that it will not wear our from normal shooting, it would take a drop onto a hard surface to damage it.

PS Buydig.com has it for $70 plus $7 shipping, no tax.

 

[Marinerbaby]

She is just beautiful! I love the third shot and I think it would be a great black and white.

 

[tony64]

I Like the shots.
The only constructive thought I can add to the list already given would be on the first shoot you appear to be looking down on her, were as in the other pics. you are down on her level which i think makes a better picture
Am sure someone will have other ideas but that is only my preferance.