last one for ages

Latest Posts Photography Forums The Shark Tank last one for ages

This topic contains 18 replies, has 13 voices, and was last updated by  bucweeet 3 months ago.

  • Author
  • #398984



    55.0 mm

    do not book me for weds and babes……seriously………give me shit,listen not a lot…………………sry last baby…………….target use me for harder and harder….ouch! 🙂

    tis a dreadful storm abrewing………………..say what u want,and ur probably right………….but im righter lol ! 🙂

  • #398997


    Falxy: fyi Flickr would not load photo. actually i have a question, you post f/2.8 and f/5.6  then 1/1000 and 2000; did you take two photos and put them together?  i understand f/  for aperture and 1/1000 for shutter speed so why two sets of numbers?  Thanks.

  • #399000


    hey the image is as…..i take no more or no less……………whatis is is



    • #399009


      Ok, so the picture is the picture, still wondering about the metadata?

      • #399032

        Rob Eyers

        F/5.6, 1/1000, ISO 2000…¿f5.6? From maybe one too many wobblies?…only Duncan could tell 😉

        • #399121


          Thanks Rob Eyers: sometimes i miss the obvious, ISO makes sense with shutter speed and 5.6 makes sense when i think about the depth of field and sharpness of the whole image. duh.    2.8 i will ignore 🙂


  • #399005

    Tom M

    Very cute Falxy. Sometimes your writing seems so scatterbrained sometimes 🙂 Hard to understand what you are saying…

  • #399034

    Rob Eyers

    Cute shot Duncan. ST …maybe darken dad’s t-shirt a bit.

  • #399105

    Graham Hart

    Billyspad will probably vomit his weetbix up if he reads this at breakfast but I kinda see a story in this pic Falxy. I see a new life looking foward at the future and all it holds. The adults, now parents with shifted priorities, see the future only in their child.

    I like the composition with the adults cropped to emphasise a supporting role rather than a prime element. The child’s smile is pure gold. This says something about ‘the meaning of life’ to me.

    I like it a lot.

    • #399144


      Actually Graham I quite like the picture its cutesy but a little different.

      I did not bring my cereal back just scratched my head and wondered where you buy your weed. I thought my guy was good but your dealer must be special.

      The “meaning of life” huh as in

      Stoners live and stoners die but in the end we all get high

      so if in life you don’t succeed sod this shit and smoke some weed

      • #399322

        Graham Hart

        Damn! Maybe I’ll get you next time Billy. Keep on Truckin’ 🙂

  • #399129


    Pictures of kids with parent or parents are poignant, personal, ripe with meaning and, if the viewer has had any experience with similar, very communicative.  There is nothing wrong with this picture and lots that there is right about it.  Let us not get too caught up in the technical and the search for perfection. Sometimes good photography is simply capturing the moment; it that is too snapshottish, so be it.

    I have a household favorite which I cannot post because it hasn’t been digitized yet (ask me again in about 8 weeks) but it, like this one, speaks volumes about human bonds.

    Caitlin Johnstone said this wekeend:

    “What is love?”

    A deeply felt and enthusiastic “yes” to the experience of something.”


    Could be a suggestion for a “throwdown”.

  • #399138


    I’m with Graham (and Ed) on this one, Duncan.  Well done.  I would try out a subtle vignette, think it would add.

  • #399368

    Maureen Photograph

    Lovely!  I thought Dad was too prominent so I cropped some off the left, and the top, darkened his shirt, applied subtle vignette, and slightly de-saturated the parents.  You might also consider cleaning up some of Mom’s hair near baby’s face.

    • #399371


      The baby’s smile makes this photo look rather alive, it’s a well-caught moment for sure.

      I’m with Maureen when it comes to editing suggestion – it would be nice to clean up stray hair near the baby’s face.

  • #399518

    Faan Behrens

    Cropping the bottom of the frame would remove most of the mothers blouse, which is too prominent in the photo.

  • #399956

    Bruce Gordon

    Great image! If I were going to change anything, I might have gone for a slightly lower camera position, so you were looking very slightly up at the baby instead of just slightly down. That would increase the importance of the subject. I also agree with the use of a slight vignette. It’s amazing how even a subtle, almost unnoticeable vignette can focus the viewer’s attention.

  • #400172


    yeah rolls over and over and ov…..etc………………………….thx all for kind comments and ways to improve……………….but not wot im looking for.

    tell me its flawed to the point of death(Maureen i love you but please don’t alter)

    ah moms top frames and neatly encompasses the importance of mothers over fathers with the very young….and rightly so! 🙂

  • #400365


    Just for you Falxy (and you asked for ST comments)

    Baby is soft… try sharpening slightly (I know babies are… soft).  All those ‘pieces of hair’ are in better focus than baby.

    Speaking of which… clone out the loose strands of hair that are both close to and distracting from baby

    Add a bit of light to the whites of baby’s eyes to give them a little bit more ‘pop’.

    Add saturation to baby’s irises/eyes to bring out the gorgeous blue.

    Clean baby’s RH nostril (camera left)…

    Did I mention… sharpen… yes… to the eyes and mouth at least.

    Oh, and crop the image… I think you may have an idea where and how.

    Actually, I think it’s a great image ‘as is’… I then I en’visioned’ it with a crop and have to agree with at least that one.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.