Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New born photographs. (Actually 12 days old!)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    New born photographs. (Actually 12 days old!)

    A friend asked would I photograph her first grand child. I have always shied away from portraits because I feel uncomfortable making small talk; but a baby cannot talk, and you can pose her!
    I was relieved when Mum said she didn't want any Anne Geddes style photos. So armed with an iPad and a few images downloaded off the Internet for inspiration we had a lovely morning. I thought I would be embarrassed with Dad around because I didn't know him, but once I realised he had tattoos..... we simply had to show them off.
    I will try and attach a few. Constructive criticism welcomed.
    Thanks, Jan
    IMG_2606 UnSh NIK B&W 800px by Janet Harper, on Flickr
    IMG_2532 NIK B&W UnSh 800px by Janet Harper, on Flickr
    IMG_2552 UnSh Nik B&W 800px by Janet Harper, on Flickr
    IMG_2545 UnSh Nik B&W 800px by Janet Harper, on Flickr
    IMG_2638 UnSh Nik B&W 800px by Janet Harper, on Flickr
    Janet

    Canon 90D, 77D, Plus a load of lenses, especially macro.
    http://www.leighcameraclub.co.uk/

    #2
    Re: New born photographs. (Actually 12 days old!)

    A very fine set that works well in mono and I'm sure mum and dad will be thrilled with them

    I did take a look at the others on your Flickr page and you have some excellent ones there too and I have to say I prefer the alternative 'baby on the arm' shot (IMG_2543) as she looks more relaxed and doesn't have creases in her skin. Sadly, baby isn't sharp in the mum and grandmum shot

    Cheers,
    John

    Comment


      #3
      Re: New born photographs. (Actually 12 days old!)

      A very nice set.....well executed.
      Brian Vickers LRPS

      brianvickersphotography.com

      Comment


        #4
        Re: New born photographs. (Actually 12 days old!)

        Well done

        Tom

        Comment


          #5
          Re: New born photographs. (Actually 12 days old!)

          Thanks for your comments. John, I agree with what you said. In the group photo, I was on the shallowest depth of field and spot metering, but I think they moved after I focussed on the baby's eye, but I have to say I love the adoring looks. My reasoning behind choosing that particular 'arm' image was the other had a bit of man-boob and more of his second arm, so couldn't decide between that or baby creases!
          Any more constructive comments would be welcome.
          Janet

          Canon 90D, 77D, Plus a load of lenses, especially macro.
          http://www.leighcameraclub.co.uk/

          Comment

          Working...
          X