# High Key for her Royal Highness!



## CCericola (Feb 1, 2011)

Some more of the new baby. She is getting better in front of the camera.


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 1, 2011)

So cute


----------



## mindfloodz (Apr 25, 2011)

Her eyes look beautiful, especially in the first picture!


----------



## Bgagnon127 (Apr 25, 2011)

She's beautiful and overall I love the photos. I do think the soft blur effect is a little too much, I'd like to see more of her sharp and in focus. Overall great photos though.


----------



## the urban photo (Jun 28, 2011)

All three are too soft and blurry for my taste. But maybe that is the effect you were going for. They seem a bit over processed.
Composition wise, I don't like that the baby is directly centered in the last shot. I would probably cut off some of the open space to the left.

In all three, her eyes are the strongest aspect. Cute baby!


----------



## Christie Photo (Jun 28, 2011)

All very nice.  I love soft focus, but with the eyes SO very sharp, I'm having a bit of trouble with it.  Did you try any with the eyes just a bit softer.

Very nice.

And you model is a real cutie!

-Pete


----------



## Rkee (Jun 29, 2011)

Pretty , But I like the soft effect But I uses a mask and brings back the sharpness in the eyes and face . I love the first one if the eyes and face details were sharper


----------



## CourtneyRPhotography (Jul 1, 2011)

they are nice, but the softness and brightness hurts my eyes or it could just be me..


----------



## edouble (Jul 1, 2011)

I as well, loke the soft focus and sharp eyes, nice contrast.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 1, 2011)

I like the photos, but am not a fan of the soft focus. I feel like I've had too many drinks when I look at them.


----------



## CCericola (Jul 1, 2011)

Thanks for the input. I wasn't actually looking for C&C but thanks for taking the time. To The Urban Photo who dug up this older post; The difference between my centered photo and yours is that mine is an example of implied symmetry broken by the position of her right arm creating classic tension.  Your photo of toes is just centered without symmetry, real or implied that is why it is a weak composition. For those that would like to compare, here is the thread that prompted The Urban Photo to comment on this thread: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...54-newborn-shoot-baby-jaydin.html#post2279760


----------



## the urban photo (Jul 1, 2011)

CCericola said:


> Thanks for the input. I wasn't actually looking for C&C but thanks for taking the time. To The Urban Photo who dug up this older post; The difference between my centered photo and yours is that mine is an example of implied symmetry broken by the position of her right arm creating classic tension.  Your photo of toes is just centered without symmetry, real or implied that is why it is a weak composition. For those that would like to compare, here is the thread that prompted The Urban Photo to comment on this thread: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...54-newborn-shoot-baby-jaydin.html#post2279760



CCericola, I actually didn't dig up this thread to be rude, as it seems you've implied. I searched "newborn" to find information in threads started by other users and yours popped up. To be quite honest, I didn't even notice that you were the same user who posted on mine. I'm sorry if you saw it as some sort of retaliation, but really I just thought I'd give my honest two cents. I'm sorry if that's not what you were looking for.


----------



## CCericola (Jul 1, 2011)

No, I'm sorry. I did think you were singling me out and I responded like a child. There are no excuses and I'm sorry.


----------

