# Half way through the busy season...



## EJBPhoto (Oct 18, 2009)

Haven't posted here in forever so figured I would post some recent images from this fall's sessions. It's been a busy year- tiring but a lot of fun.

All shot with the 5d, 85 1.2, at around 1.2.

Thanks for looking!  Happy to answer any questions or get settings.

1.






2.





3.





4.





5. 





6. 





7. Singing Taylor Swift for me...





8.





9. 





11.  





13.





14.





15. 





16.





17.


----------



## ErectedGryphon (Oct 18, 2009)

Some very nice work, don't much care for that distracting band running through the middle though.


----------



## EJBPhoto (Oct 18, 2009)

ErectedGryphon said:


> Some very nice work, don't much care for that distracting band running through the middle though.



It's a watermark. It is meant to protect your images from clients saving them off of your blog, and to protect your clients from internet predators.  It is a necessity for children's photographers- I'm not sure if you work with children.  

Always open to CC, although CC on the watermark seems a bit trivial!  Especially on the professional forum where professionals understand clients stealing work is a prevalent problem today.  

CC on the actual art is always very appreciated though.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 19, 2009)

I have no idea why 1,8,13,and 16 are framed as horizontals. Same with 9, with the family under the pier; by framing them horizontally, it makes them appear smaller and less significant.


----------



## mrodgers (Oct 19, 2009)

EJBPhoto said:


> ErectedGryphon said:
> 
> 
> > It's a watermark. It is meant to protect your images from clients saving them off of your blog, and to protect your clients from internet predators.  It is a necessity for children's photographers- I'm not sure if you work with children.
> ...


----------



## bigtwinky (Oct 19, 2009)

I don't find the watermark THAT distracting and in fact find it way less distracting than other watermarks I have seen here.  I guess I'm not zen enough to get into the CC trans that most people get into here and can't be distracted by anything.  I try and see it as white noise, learn to look around it!

Oh wow, look at that nice image... oh wait, I can't see anything anymore there is this darn watermark that totally destroys it.  Seriously.

Without turning this into a watermark debate...

I love the bokeh on these images, its simply outstanding.

I wont go through and comment on all, as there are too many for that.  I'm also not a pro and don't have the expertise to shoot things like this, so that kinda limits what I can say 

4- I'm wondering how being slighty more to the right in this image would of worked, which would of allowed to see both eyes.  While the framing is great, being a portrait of a kid, the eyes and establishing more contact with the viewer is important.

5- I absolutely love the framing in this one and the texture of the tree.

9- While I agree with Derrel with the horizontal framing of 1, I like the horizontal framing of 9.  It allows for better use of the peer and the lines and tunnel effect it creates.

15- is just precious.


----------



## MACollum (Oct 19, 2009)

I agree with bigtwinky; the watermarks are not THAT much of a distraction. I love the photos and had no trouble "looking through" the watermarks. I can't go as low as f/1.2 but now I want to try some portraits wide open on my 50mm 1.8!


----------



## Felix0890 (Oct 19, 2009)

If you are being distracted by a simple transparent watermark, consider getting some medication for ADD . . . a professional is not going to post up his work for the world to download at their hearts' content.

The shots are beautiful! This made me want to buy that lens hehe.  Do you have any tips on getting those bright, reflective eyes (besides focusing on the eyes)?  You capture them so beautifully.  I do agree that some should be vertical to bring more attention to the family, but only 9 would really benefit form this, IMO.


----------



## [Dillz] (Oct 20, 2009)

11 and the last are awesome! Couldn't be any better!  Great job.


----------



## Rekd (Oct 20, 2009)

Those watermarks are distracting from the complete picture, so to speak. They remove the initial wow factor you'd get when seeing them for the first time because your eye focuses on the watermark instead of the composition. Then you kind of just look at it for a second and think to yourself "Oh, yeah. That's pretty good."

Pictures that make more people literally say "wow" don't have the distractions like that. Look in the Put Up or Shut Up thread.

Anyone can see the composition after examining it for a second or three, but they don't get the feeling they would get when seeing the picture for the first time instead of the watermark. 

Know what I mean?

IMNSHO, a talented photog shouldn't put something that gawdy across nice shots like that, _especially _if said photog were in a forum full of professionals asking for critiques on their work.



> It is meant to protect ... your clients from internet predators. It is a necessity for children's photographers- I'm not sure if you work with children.


Orly?

I'm no lawyer, but I did stay at a Howard Johnson's last weekend (went to Disneyland for my 15 year anniversary. Kids had more fun at the mini water park at the hotel than they did at Disneyland. We could have saved hundreds!!), and I've been using children in my work for years. Never heard of watermarking your child picts to "protect them from predators" before. Releases? Check! Not showing faces or "distinguishable" features? CHECK! Watermaking? Uh. Newp. :er:

Heck, most of your watermarks aren't even over the the children's eyes. Perhaps if you used one of those black bands across their eyes like they do on America's Funniest Home Videos it would "protect" them better? 

Seriously, I'm just poking fun. You know your stuff is good and we know you're just here to garner praise from your peers. You'll have better luck wowing some of the real talent here if you either post un-fubar'd fotos or reduce them to a size you'd be comfortable with having people, um, _steal_.

As for a critique on the actual shots, there are several heads chopped off that probably would be better if left intact, or if you truly were trying to get the faces isolated, chop the necks off, too. 3 should simply show the entire head. 

Really like the DOF on the baby feet. The cropping should be horizontal on that one.


----------



## rubbertree (Oct 21, 2009)

beautiful!! 
#3 though... wow. So much wisdom in those eyes!


----------



## EJBPhoto (Oct 21, 2009)

About ATVs said:


> Those watermarks are distracting from the complete picture, so to speak. They remove the initial wow factor you'd get when seeing them for the first time because your eye focuses on the watermark instead of the composition. Then you kind of just look at it for a second and think to yourself "Oh, yeah. That's pretty good."
> 
> Pictures that make more people literally say "wow" don't have the distractions like that. Look in the Put Up or Shut Up thread.
> 
> ...



Your posts are incredibly negative. I've been a member here for 3 years, from the moment I picked up my camera and was shooting in automatic mode.  I'm hardly someone that is here for praise from my peers- I'm a member of many forums and my membership here existed long before I even knew how to operate a camera.  You're more than welcome to look back at my original posts and see my progression and questions.  I've never been one to post out of ego.  I can't tell you I'm here for CC- I think you understand as a professional who shoots a lot, at a certain point you can CC your own photos quite well. I'm here to share with the community, to be one of the few children's professionals who posts in this forum (most tend to work in other genres), and to share inspiration for posing and newer photogs.  i'm here because I think it is helpful to have photographers on all different walks posting in this forum, and because it is fun to share.  Why are you here?  I have a hard time believing, with all of the hot air, that it is purely for critique of your images. 

With all that said, I am not at all opposed to good CC.  I welcome it happily, always have.  But to say I'm here to look for compliments seems silly and superficial.  I'm here for the same reason other professionals are here.  I'm sorry my watermark is so offending to you- I truly suggest you consider opting out of my threads in the future as I feel you will be utterly disappointed every time as I will always include a watermark.  It's understandable that not everyone enjoys every single thread and I completely respect your right to not read mine.  I do think you are completely absurd to say that a talented photographer wouldn't watermark this work like this.  It seems entirely simple-minded to judge talent on a watermark, but to each their own.  Thank you for the valuable CC that you did offer.  I'll understand your stance when you no longer offer CC in my threads.  Certain threads on here aren't for everyone- unless I have something constructive to say I generally skip out on the threads that don't appeal to me.

To everyone else, thanks so much for the CC.  It's hard because I have most pictures as vertical and horizontal for the client to choose- I just generally choose horizontal for my blog as I like the way it reads better.  I definitely agree about the feet picture- would definitely have liked that as horizontal.  Tried doing some cropping but didn't like the look in the end, but wish it had been composed better in camera.  Twinky- great advice on 4.  I definitely see that and am uphappy with the angle as well.  I have a couple other similar versions but none I'm in love with.

About the eyes, it's mostly just getting a lot of light in the eyes. A lot of facing my subject into the sky, open shade, garages, etc.  I occasionally dodge the catchlights only on highlight mode to bring the catchlights out a bit more.  I hope that helps!! 

The lens is fabulous- I absolutely adore it.  It is just so magical and once you get used to shooting wide open, the more fun it gets.  I guess I'm someone that needs a lot of BAM in my images, and I feel like this lens provides that.  Sometimes I go too crazy with it and I actually think the picture would benefit from a more closed up aperture, so still always working on that.

Thanks for the CC and comments! Appreciate it!


----------



## Christie Photo (Oct 22, 2009)

I don't understand the hang-up on the horizontal framing...  especially here!!  I can't imagine the first one framed vertically.  You'd lose much of that wonderful background.  You'd definitely loose that outdoor...  that "orchard" feel.

Whether you realize it or not, you're picking up on the subtle leading lines created by the shoulder in 3 and 8, and by the hair in 16.  These lines combined with the negative space afforded by the horizontal framing brings our eye right to your subject.  Well done!

It looks like you had a tough time with the girl in 7, flat lighting and all.  Neither of these images would be very strong on it's own, but putting them together like this is a creative solution.  And, you did get her in 5.

All very nice.


----------



## _rebecca_ (Oct 22, 2009)

re: watermarks.... as someone who has had pictures of children "stolen" and used by others, I can definitely understand the need for it. Like it or not, it happens. Sometimes it can be very unpleasant. I will always use a watermark when posting pictures of little ones on-line and I consider it a "lesson learned". I think critiquing an obviously well-done photo based on something as trivial as a watermark is just petty.

Very nice collection! I find posts like this inspiring. There are a lot of ideas here I can keep in mind for myself to improve!


----------



## zendianah (Oct 22, 2009)

Erin, I have always been a fan of your work and this time is no exception. I love what you do and you do it very well. Your DOF is amazing. How do you get your pics so tac sharp?


----------



## NJMAN (Oct 23, 2009)

Your work is beautiful as ever Erin.  I'm always inspired.  

On a different note, I can see some things have not changed here.  It is very unfortunate too see fly-by-nights post such ugly and hateful comments on here.


----------



## bell (Oct 24, 2009)

Wonderful shots Erin. There is a serenity in all of them. Congradulations. Inspiring. Keep them coming... Never give up...

I am new to this Forum. I have just arrived to your land. I don't even know how to oplen images yet. So forgive me if I commit an error.

When you work in the land of digital photography, you need to find some kind of protection. This watermark serves the purpose of protection quite right.

In the past some clients took my 8"x10" prints, scanned them, cloned my embossed seal on the bottom corner and took the new digital files to Loblaws or Costco to get multiple copies done. They don't want to spend the amount to buy the high res CD, that's what they do. For some quality or copyright means nothing.

We can't win that war...

Cheers,

HB


----------



## twocolor (Oct 24, 2009)

I disagree with the watermark affecting the wow factor.  

I said WOW out loud as I looked at these.  Perfect exposure, perfect focus, beautifuly portrayed emotions!!!

Great job!


----------



## JCleveland (Oct 31, 2009)

twocolor said:


> I disagree with the watermark affecting the wow factor.
> 
> I said WOW out loud as I looked at these.  Perfect exposure, perfect focus, beautifuly portrayed emotions!!!
> 
> Great job!



I too said WOW. 

All I can say is FAB FAB FAB. I absolutely adore viewing your work. As multiple others have mentioned, your work is inspiring. 

Thanks for sharing!


----------



## wh1ppet (Nov 2, 2009)

Nice pictures. The quality is great IMO.
Perhaps the only thing I see is the bloody scrape on dad's ankle in the last picture. It'd be easy to photoshop that out.

The baby in 2&3 has that mysterious alien look to it?


----------



## Brian L (Nov 2, 2009)

I agree the watermark is fine. Seems a lot of people on here think it effects the photo. Why are you looking at that? Do you not want it there to so you can steal the photo to make you a better photography? Ya that is what I thought. You non pros. 


Good work! Keep putting those watermarks across that image. Any real pro on here won't say anything bad bout your watermark.


----------



## dry3210 (Nov 3, 2009)

Nice job capturing the eyes on 3!


----------



## itznfb (Nov 3, 2009)

Excellent shots.
I too really like the horizontal framing in some of the shots. Especially #9. The perspective of the beams makes it look like you're zooming into the subject.

about the watermark... If you are a professional photographer and you don't take the steps to protect your work and your clients with as much as a simple watermark then you don't deserve clients at all.

secondly... If you're distracted from reviewing a photo because of a transparent watermark then you do indeed need medication. Or you're just here to be a troll.


----------



## EJBPhoto (Nov 5, 2009)

Thanks everyone!  I really appreciate it.  Thank you for the validation- you know how much it means when you feel like you're doing so many sessions this time of year and just churning them out and sometimes you doubt your work when a mixture of good and then terrible orders come in.

About the bloody ankle- didn't even notice that!!!  Thanks!


----------



## tissa (Apr 29, 2010)

Ok I just now noticed your works and I must say that you are my new hero! 

How did you learn to take such pictures and what tips would you give for a newbie to get at least a little close to the images you create? 
Thank you!


----------



## bennielou (Apr 29, 2010)

Gorgeous Fantastic work!  I actually gasped when I saw it.  Beatufiful!!!!


----------



## mcopan (May 27, 2010)

First off. GREAT work. These photos are crisp and well thought out. I really like them. Secondly, I find there is a lot of people in general that are looking to complain or argue on anything they can especially if they can hide behind a computer. 

The water marks are great and are nicely done.  I am thinking out what type of watermark I will use for any of the postings where photos can be used without consent. 

GREAT WORK!


----------



## ShutterShaman (May 27, 2010)

Arrrghh! #4 is totally great!


----------



## DTG (May 28, 2010)

*Beautiful photos and how happy these clients will be to have photos that they will cherish for a lifetime!!*

PS...I'm still new here, pop in and out once in awhile and I am amazed at how negative these posts go that I sometimes think people go off in tangents that just take away from the talent and learning experiences of others.  I come back hoping for a more positive experience but, so far, I keep striking out 

Say, what you will.  I have all email notifications turned off, so if anyone comments, most likely I will not even see it.


----------



## fiirmoth (Jun 1, 2010)

I really like 1. 16. and 17. Great shots


----------

