My Father and I

[GB1]

A little self portrait taken in February. I think it's moderately interesting.

G

[LeeIs]

GB, it is interesting.

I like the idea of the shadows, the problem for me is, where the shadows are cast isn't interesting in itself. Like if the shadows were cast across the grand canyon for example. it would make this type of shot really work. But here, the shadows are cast against a giant uninteresting rock-face.

[GB1]

Hmm. I see what you mean Liban. To me the rock is 5/10 on the interest scale, but the mini waterfall and man made background add an "at the zoo" feeling to it. Thanks for commenting though. It''s hard to be objective on such wonderful subjects ! :lol:

[armando_m]

I like it and find this interesting

While it can be made vs a better background the title goes great with the shadows on the rock

[Greg McCary]

A very sweet picture but my problem is the shadow splitting right through the center of the fall. Also nothing about this photo tells me that it is father and son without the title. One for the family album and to be a treasure one day.

[Anbesol]

The highlights are a little clipped on the left in the rock. Also, the shadows have an extra blue color temperature. If you shot this raw, produce two white balances and merge the two correct white balances together, maybe increase recovery for the clipped highlights. Otherwise you could use a photo filter or a color balance with a layer of the shadows. Definitely has the "at-the-zoo" feeling, but I think that makes it a good piece for a family photo album.

[LeeIs]

Hmm. I see what you mean Liban. To me the rock is 5/10 on the interest scale, but the mini waterfall and man made background add an "at the zoo" feeling to it. Thanks for commenting though. It''s hard to be objective on such wonderful subjects ! :lol:

oh btw, I mention the grand canyon because the fence here reminded me of that nice fence shot you shared some time ago.
yeah definitely there are always photos that are closer to our hearts because of the people involved

[Overbeyond]

The texture in the rocks comes over so strongly that it almost looks as if the image has been overcooked and heavy grain has been added (which of course is not the case). I'm not sure whether this works as a portrait in any way GB; I can definitely see why it has a bit of the "at the zoo" effect though.

[gahspidy]

This is really good, but I agree with Liban and Greg about the location of the shot and shadows. I really feel cropping this into a square to just show the shadows against the rock works nicely.
Also, i think your trying to bring out too much detail from the shadows and we are seeing a lot of degradation there. the shadows should look fine dark and natural with very little rock texture showing through.
Really nice catch

[GB1]

Thanks fellows. Just a spur of the moment shot as I anchored my camera on the rail. I like his hat in this one, gives it personality.

Ok, I see that a crop may be the only thing that can solve the odd background issue. Here's a few tries.

Anbesol, I tried your suggestion with the separate layer but I'm not sure how far to go when it comes to density - which do you like?

Gary, cropped it is. btw, I didn't add any grain as far as I recall: one can tell by looking at the non-rock areas. I don't even know if this was a real rock as they added a lot of (chezzy) exhibit props in the latest zoo upgrade. Some new photo opps now though.

Tom, yeah, it's not really posed and you can barely tell that I shot it as the camera's in shadow. Welcome back btw.

Thanks too Greg, Armando and Liban. Digital shots are free, so seems like we're more willing to experiment.

G

[Anbesol]

The second is much better, definitely. Specularity still looks really high for my liking, but on a bad monitor now so its hard to tell.