Posts tagged “couple

Candid-ish Christmas Group Portrait

Family Christmas 24mm, f/8, 1/160s, ISO ?, flash bounced on wall behind the camera

I was revisiting some of my favorite photos recently  — most of which don’t get shared because they aren’t worth much photographically speaking.  I decided to share this one since it’s a good illustration of a semi-candid shot that one might not consider taking but ends up being a (personally) memorable shot.  After opening all our presents on Christmas Eve morning we gathered all of us (minus the two out-of-town siblings and the baby who was sleeping), threw wrapping paper around, and snapped some photos.  The setup was simple: camera on a tripod with on-camera flash bounced on the wall behind the camera.  I have a remote but I just used the self-timer here.  If I were trying to get the “ideal” shot I would have rearranged the room to allow a longer lens to be used and avoid the distortion from the wide-angle.  I would have also lit up the background (simply by turning on lights in the other rooms) so it wasn’t so dark.  I probably would’ve gotten out an umbrella or two and the remote triggers.  However, I would have also annoyed everyone and made them impatient 🙂  In the end we got a fun picture that we all like.

Advertisements

Off To Hawaii!

20120125-214514.jpg
We’re off to Hawaii and I’m I’m taking the opportunity to post an iPhone snapshot of my wife and daughter in the airport waiting for our flight. I’m posting via inflight wifi and typing in the WordPress app with one hand on my iPhone (my wife’s coffee in the other). I honestly don’t know how it’s going to look with respect to photo size, etc. — I’ve never used the app to write any posts before.

Little Eden slept for hours while we waited for our (delayed) flight then woke up as we pulled away from the gate. Nancy fed her as we gained altitude so her ears could pop and she’s been a perfect angel ever since. What a sweetheart!

My friend Jim Nix at http://nomadicpursuits.com has been doing a lot of iphoneography lately and this is a perfect post to call that out and point you to his blog.

Hope this post turns out alright..


Replacing Color In Photoshop

Portrait, Color Replaced

Portrait, Color Replaced

I recently posted our Thanksgiving Day family portrait and today wanted to show how I modified it.  The only direction I gave to the family for the picture was “wear something solid-ish on top, and something denim on the bottom”.  As you see in the picture at this link, we all ended up in rather muted colors except my youngest son who had a bright yellow shirt on.  I was busy thinking about how to add fill to the shot, position us reasonably without taking all day to do it, etc. (I should have spent a bit more time on the positioning).  So, when the bright yellow shirt was pointed out to me I thought to myself, “Whatever…it won’t matter”.  Of course, when editing the photos it bugged me to death and I wished I had changed it.

The solution?  Photoshop’s “Replace Color” adjustment.  I used the tutorial linked below as a starting point to learn about it and experimented from there.  Other than choosing the new color, the key setting for me was the “fuzziness”.  This determines how aggressive the automatic selection is.  What I found is that because of the variation in saturation throughout the shirt I had to slide the fuzziness way up which causes other parts of the image to also be selected (trying to automatically select the shirt’s colors reveals how much variation is really there).  I thought the checkbox for ‘Localized Color Clusters” (not shown in the tutorial but exists in CS5 at least) would help minimize the selection but I didn’t see a lot of difference once the the fuzziness was increased much. I also used the +/- eye droppers to add/subtract from the selection. Finally I needed a bit of manual masking to only change the shirt and not other areas of the image.  Something which is more solid in color would far easier to use this tool with.  The resulting photo is above — a 5-minute edit.  I will probably do another version and use a color picked from someone else’s shirt so that it matches even better with the rest of us.  When I look at the new image I kind of think it doesn’t look right because *I* know that I made the edit but in my brief survey of people who didn’t know about it, not a single person noticed anything.

Here’s the link to the tutorial I started with.


Strolling on the Beach

http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeltuuk/6309694070/in/photostream

Strolling On The Beach 50mm, f/2, 1/4000s, ISO 100

I was very surprised to find that one of my (not-so-freshly-pressed) posts was featured on WordPress Freshly Pressed. I started thinking about what post I should follow up with to hopefully meet the expectations of any new followers, etc.  I’m humble enough to realize that I’ve got nothing but photographs that *I* like — and hopefully others will like many of them.  What’s the Ansel Adams quote?  Something like “There no rules for good photographs, only good photographs”.  And of course “good” is defined by personal taste.  So…I’m just posting the next picture I had already planned to post in hopes that others like it too 🙂

On a recent trip to the Texas coast I was setting up for some bokeh shots with the 50mm f/1.4 and noticed this couple approaching.  I quickly focused on the sand and recomposed to catch them as they passed in front of the camera.  I said a quick ‘hello’ but otherwise pretended to ignore them and clicked off a couple of shots as they were in the frame.

My camera was already at what I considered a good aperture for this situation — f/2.  From experience I knew that anything larger and the background would be too blurred to provide enough detail to give a sense of where the shot was taken.  I had already experimented with some f/1.4 shots taken at a very close distance from the subject and the background was completely lost.  For all you could tell, I was in a bright room inside my house as opposed to the beach.  Sometimes that’s a nice effect but when I’m at the beach I typically want to show, or at the very least hint strongly, that I’m at the beach.

I knew my focus wouldn’t be perfect.  With such a shallow depth of field it usually doesn’t work to recompose your image since you end up swinging the whole plane of focus away from the subject [see below for a short, lame-ish explanation of that].  I had no time to worry about that nor did I care for this shot since I didn’t really want to capture any detail of the couple — I was going for the overall scene of “some couple” walking on the beach.  With the blown-out highlights and backlighting a precise point of focus wasn’t going to matter much anyway.  I’m not wild about the composition but again, this was a hurried, serendipitous shot.  The almost-opaque frame around the image was something I added while experimenting with OnOne Software’s Photoframe.  I’m not sure if I like it but I’m considering this one “done”.

About those depth of field issues when recomposing a shot…When you focus your camera on a particular point, imagine a plane that is perpendicular to line between your lens and subject.  Everything on that plane (including everything near the plane within the range of your chosen depth of field) will be in focus.  Taking that further, if you focus on a subject 10 feet away it will obviously be in focus, but so will anything on the flat plane (NOT arc) which goes left and right from that point.  [Here’s an illustration — not sure how helpful]  When you focus and then rotate the camera (recompose) that whole plane moves.  If you have a large depth of field (ie small aperture and/or fairly large distance to the focus point) that may not matter because the subject remains within the in-focus region even when you rotate the plane.  If the depth of field is very narrow there’s a good chance that you end up moving the subject out of the in-focus region (actually you move the plane of focus away from the subject as you rotate it).  I’ve seen a great illustration of this somewhere…I’m not able to find it with a couple quick internet searches though.