# Its that time of year again  (family portrait overload)



## paigew

I have been blessed to be busy this season with some really amazing families. I have so many favorites I had a hard time narrowing down what to share. It has been a long time since I have posted client work... so, thanks for looking 

1



2



3



4



5




6



7




8


9



10




full sessions on the blog


----------



## bribrius

wow. you have showed some huge improvement!


----------



## Derrel

Your style has really emerged,evolved, and solidified over the last couple years. Beautiful pictures, Paige.


----------



## D-B-J

Damned good Paige. [emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]


----------



## paigew

bribrius said:


> wow. you have showed some huge improvement!


thank you! I have shot a lot of photos since last year 


Derrel said:


> Your style has really emerged,evolved, and solidified over the last couple years. Beautiful pictures, Paige.


thank you Derrel 


D-B-J said:


> Damned good Paige. [emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]


Thank you Jake


----------



## paigew

bumping up for the weekday crowd


----------



## vintagesnaps

I'll admit I'm not particularly fond of the underexposed backlit look; at least not all the time, but many of these are very nicely done. Obviously this look is popular these days and what a lot of people want. I think many effects work better done sparingly.

Something seems a little off (at least partly how they're showing up on here, something like the girl's dress that's leopard print - up close they look like squares but clicked and enlarged they look like spots as they should). But to me though the color looks a bit overdone in some, such as in the skin tones; the sky is white but in a few they look almost made up. On your site some look somewhat soft, so maybe it depends on where they're posted they might look different in quality.

Some of the grayscale too look somewhat off, almost harsh but yet not black and white, to me they seem noticeably processed which I think can overpower the image itself.

I'd think about vantage point and framing; the posed shots are done nicely and you're getting some wonderful facial expressions, in others there is plenty of space above heads but fingertips or feet cropped off. In some of the shots like kids playing there are distractions that if framed differently or from a slightly different vantage point might have been out of the frame and could have made for cleaner compositions. You seem to do well interacting with your subjects, they look like they're having fun.


----------



## JohnnyWrench

Number 7 FTW... That image is great!


----------



## Forkie

Number 2, the black and white one - awesome conversion!  Same for #10.   Great job!


----------



## paigew

vintagesnaps said:


> I'll admit I'm not particularly fond of the underexposed backlit look; at least not all the time, but many of these are very nicely done. Obviously this look is popular these days and what a lot of people want. I think many effects work better done sparingly.
> 
> Something seems a little off (at least partly how they're showing up on here, something like the girl's dress that's leopard print - up close they look like squares but clicked and enlarged they look like spots as they should). But to me though the color looks a bit overdone in some, such as in the skin tones; the sky is white but in a few they look almost made up. On your site some look somewhat soft, so maybe it depends on where they're posted they might look different in quality.
> 
> Some of the grayscale too look somewhat off, almost harsh but yet not black and white, to me they seem noticeably processed which I think can overpower the image itself.
> 
> I'd think about vantage point and framing; the posed shots are done nicely and you're getting some wonderful facial expressions, in others there is plenty of space above heads but fingertips or feet cropped off. In some of the shots like kids playing there are distractions that if framed differently or from a slightly different vantage point might have been out of the frame and could have made for cleaner compositions. You seem to do well interacting with your subjects, they look like they're having fun.



Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I will have to start out by disagreeing with you, none of these images are underexposed. Maybe you don't like the way I chose to expose them. But they are not underexposed. I am not sure what you mean about "made up sky...I don't add skies, what you see is what you get . As far as editing goes, it is definitely my thing. I do it my way and I do it the way I like it  Not trying to be snobby but in this biz you gotta have a hard attitude and not loose yourself in the opinions of others.  I shoot and edit from the heart (with a lot of technical knowledge behind). My clients view me as an artist not a rule follower.

I'm not sure how you could look at my images and make a comment about how I need to think about vantage points and framing. I think honestly, you are just not a fan of my work. And you know what, that is okay. I don't claim to be perfect at anything, and I am by far my own worst critic; but when people ask my advice on photography and editing, you know what I say? Stop caring. Love what you do and so will others. My best work is when I loose myself in shooting/editing not when I think about that finger chop there or that fly away hair. Photography is about memories and moments for me, not perfection.

Obviously we all want perfection and I can see the value in not cropping limbs. I just put higher value on other things, like the "feeling" of the image



JohnnyWrench said:


> Number 7 FTW... That image is great!


Thank you! That is one of my favorite client images ever! 


Forkie said:


> Number 2, the black and white one - awesome conversion!  Same for #10.   Great job!


Thanks Forkie


----------



## niccas9

Thanks for sharing.  I like all of the sets that you added and I'm sure the families were all very happy.  I like your style a lot and think you did an excellent job.


----------



## hmreyna

Very cute work!!


----------



## harmonn2

Personally, I don't see how anyone could say these are underexposed. If anything (and I'm definitely not saying they are!) they would lean towards the overexposed side - but, as I said, I don't feel like they are at all. The little boy in the red flannel and the family in front of the camper are my favorite sets. All beautiful, though! Great job. I love your style


----------



## paigew

Thank you @harmonn2 [emoji2]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Robin Usagani

#2 sucks.

Nice Paige.. You kick ass.


----------



## paigew

Robin Usagani said:


> #2 sucks.
> 
> Nice Paige.. You kick ass.


Lolz. And thank you [emoji8][emoji8]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Maher

Awesome !!! 
what is you equipment and the lens type with the settings you have used?


----------



## paigew

Maher said:


> Awesome !!!
> what is you equipment and the lens type with the settings you have used?


Thank you  These were taken with my 5d mark iii and 24-70L. I can't remember the exact settings but I usually use f2.8 for one person and I go up to f4 for group shots. Shutterspeed never less than 1/320


----------



## Photos In Color

Fantastic work. Really great job at capturing the feelings. love the editing too


----------



## paigew

Photos In Color said:


> Fantastic work. Really great job at capturing the feelings. love the editing too


Thanks so much [emoji4]


----------



## George Griffeth

All of them are really great, 7 is my favorite though you don't always get pictures like that.


----------



## farmraised

These are beautiful sets! I love you're style, and you managed to capture the families in a really great way


----------



## beagle100

nice set


----------



## paigew

Thanks a lot guys [emoji4] hard to believe these sessions were done almost 2 years ago now. Time flies when your having fun [emoji328][emoji328]


----------



## TamiAz

Beautiful, as always!!


----------

