• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Challenge! Kids being kids: avaliable light and candid! :)

Michael Fontana

pro member
Shane, they' re spidermens... ;-)

I personally don't care to much about these picts; it looks like my personal °environnement° doesn't require photographs.

Just doing it for him, so he might have some image-souvenirs from his youth, later.
 

Arya Wiese

New member
I just love this thread! Here are a few images taken this past week with my new camera. The kids were just being them at the park - while I played with my new camera/lens combo.

My hubby is in the background with my daughter
DSC_0035.jpg


my daughter showing daddy she can stick her tongue out farther.
DSC_0185.jpg


and my oldest dangling from the monkey bars.
DSC_0114-1.jpg
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Shane,

You must also have movies of this too. They may deny they ever had so much fun together! As adults, we have all this suppressed.

Michael,

That's a particularly interesting background for photographs. I like the reciprocity of the kids photographing you too. I hope you have more of this. Seems that this would be interesting back lit.

Arya,

That first one looks like he's hanging from an edge of a tall building. It works in B&W. I can't imagine it would be as dramatic in color.

Will,

I went though all those pictures and realized this could be my kids too. The way they are so involved with the arts and crafts. Really innocent about the world outside the caring bubble that parents make for lucky children. Thanks for sharing and thanks to TMax.

Asher
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
Asher

yep, meanwhile the job shots are well organised and structurised, the kid shots are spontaneous, creating sometimes a interplay: here' some RAWs in iViewMediaPro, without any edits:


roserie.jpg



out of it the second point of view:

Ro_23.jpg
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Michael,

Showing multiple shots together really works. It's much more vibrant and conveys the idea of enjoyment and "togetherness" by the kids. Where does this spider web come from? I'd like to buy one!

Asher
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
I hadn't thought about making a serie out of it; the serie shows the succession of the shots, as they were taken....

but you' re correct Asher; the fimstrip adds a new element, the movement.

As for the web:
I took these shots the °parent's day° at the Kindergarten; the parents were invited to visit the childs at that place. So the web was at the Kindergarten and you might find it at Kindergarten suppliers.

BTW: In the last years, the city here improved much - in the parks - the playgrounds for children; good places for taking photos of them:

Asher: °Kids seem to live in a special world. We are the giants.°


ro_april_08_6.jpg
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
I like that blue colored last one the most Michael, but be carefull, Asher though being a "Grand Monsieur", isn't that tall ! ;-) (a few small feet only)…
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
tall?

Tall is relative ;-)


kopfvoran.jpg


It's posed, a friend took it, last summer, in the alps.
Today, 9 months later, I'm not able anymore to hold Roman that way, to heavy.

A part of children's photography - when beeing parents - is keeping moments alive.
I better don't show that shot to his mother, as it looks more dangerous, than it really was....

IMO, kids photography works best, when they have fun with you.
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
tall?

Tall is relative ;-)


kopfvoran.jpg
Hi Michael
Maybe the more interesting (and nice!) picture of this thread.
No, not a picture, a photography…

It is amazing how it works very well too upside down!


PS as to Asher's size, I was only kidding… he's in all meanings a "Grand Monsieur"!

PPS your comment about showing pictures to the mother, can you imagine my wife's reaction when she saw the shot made by Lorenz Koch (in the helicopter thread/Sinar) with my son shooting from helicopter (beside me) with no door!
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
Bonjour, Nicolas

I understand your remark about picture/photography.

off course, we were just kidding.
Meanwhile scale is a question, when taking photos of kids:


ro_playing.jpg



Usually, I don't like to much to take photos of poeple; but for Roman, I'm willing to make a exeption. Wouldn't it be said, if he didn't had photos of his youth, meanwhile his father beeing a photographer?

I don't even want to hear what your wife said about Lorenz's chopper-shot ;-)

Ok, it's their role to protect and make the children growing, meanwhile it's men's role to guide' em within °danger°....

Is that correct? I'm wondering what the mother's are saying to that last sentence....
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Michael
a subject and its context… Asher will adore that! (I do to)

BTW this has a lot to do with the difference of a picture and a photo… framing is one of the bases…

This is a remarkable picture since it actually shows not only vision of the child, but also, on a small scale looks realistically like a urban major building project, with all the earth moving heavy equipment and trucks under his command. This is a great picture and you must do much more like this.

Did you move any of the trucks or he (name please) placed them there and you photographed the scene. The fact that you went from above, gives a Gods-eye view and appears somehow more authoritarian.

So this is factive photography. But did you cheat?

At the least, the position of the camera was chosen for effect, so this is factive 90% and fictive (a fictional view of things) 10%.

Asher
 

Michael Fontana

pro member
Did you move any of the trucks or he (name please) placed them there and you photographed the scene. The fact that you went from above, gives a Gods-eye view and appears somehow more authoritarian.

So this is factive photography. But did you cheat?

At the least, the position of the camera was chosen for effect, so this is factive 90% and fictive (a fictional view of things) 10%.

Asher

Asher, its not posed; in the job, I need to arrange/move enough stuff like furniture, etc, so in privacy - beware.

Ok, some 3 years ago, I did a little portrait session in the studio; it was posed, off course, but the light set-up has been rather lazy...

So Roman's photos are spontaneous, I sometimes just grab the cam, mount a lens, that's it.
I didn't reflect' em prior to this thread, so they' re just snappies... and the approach to them/taking them is rather naive, not from a professional point of view: some I like, other less...

but I don't have to deliver 20 good shots - IMO one of the big differencies between a pro and amateur.

I'm adding the entire shooting sequence from the °factive° shot; I need first to read your thread about factive.....

ro_5_07.jpg
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
I'm working on a simple and friendly approach to letting each of us understand and admit as to what we do in photography. I'm fascinated by the creative process to see where the camera is the automatic gizmo, like a lawn watering timer and where our own imagination, originality, thoughts, culture and more inform our photography.

Observing something a child is doing, like my very first shots, involves no alteration of their activities. I have a large sequence of shots. So the series of factive but the selected angle and the final presentation although totally factual in origin is presented to be enjoyed in the best light. So it becomes 90% factive and maybe 10% fictive. Selecting just one moment is not being really utterly truthful, is it? I'm not saying that we have to be truthful but offering that it might be helpful to have insight into what we actually do!

The work in preparing just one shot for presentation involves many selections amongst numerous choices. We do this in order to project our will. So that's where the 10% fictive comes from. The figure 10 is of course pulled out of my pocket. Still it does differnetiate this from a scientific or crime picture which has to be 100% factive.

Interestingly, you series of pictures, better shows and carries the intense focus of Roman!

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Doug,

This picture is at first just a boy alone on a dock, head down, resting on the open fence. Maybe he's staring down at the water below. It's not a particularly well executed picture technically, as it seems cluttered. Despite this shortcoming, maybe because one lone boy is a sympathetic figure, we look again.

I started to think how this ordinary humble picture might have become more important to me than my quick first glance assumed. I think this is an example of where the picture encourages us to look further than what is shown. In viewing any non-scientific picture, one can bring to it our own ideas, intelligence, knowledge, imagination and fancy. It does not have to be logical or the true to any facts. Now your picture's reception is no longer just about your intent. To the extent that there's obvious meaning or coded esthetics, we'll get that, of course. There's a wooden dock, a boy is there resting his head on a beam, there's water behind him and so forth. However, we can do much more with our reasoning and imagination. So we we get to have our own say as to the meaning of your photograph!

I like the view through the window which pulls us back from just seeing the boy alone on the dock. Rather we are there from a little distance back, separated by the bars of the window. This separation qualifies our involvement to one of contemplation. The window not only separates us from the picture but, encodes for us the information that you, the photographer, is positioned, back towards us, photographing the scene in front of you and also in front of us.

This extra feeling reminds me of the impressive and grand iconic work of Caspar David Friedrich, who used an actual figure, from behind which we observe the scene he is also contemplating. This figure is called the Rückenfigur .


Caspar_David_Friedrich_032.jpg


Deutsch: Der Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer
English: The wanderer above the sea of fog
Français : Le Voyageur contemplant une mer de nuages

Caspar David Friedrich 1818. So the painting is more than 70 years old and so "Public Domain" is asserted in Wikipedia, here.


You, looking at the boy, constitutes a kind of virtual Rückenfigur. This just is my own, perhaps novel, extension of that concept. In the Friedrich's Wanderer Above the Sea we are confronted by the obviously placed observer. We are pretty certain he is contemplating what he sees. So we do the same.

Here in your picture we're signaled to consider "What's going on?", "What happened?", "What will happen next?" or "Where are the other children?" Is he staring at the water, tired, bored, lost or abandoned? So your picture becomes more about "consideration" than simple "perception", i.e. merely reading as to what is present.

You may have realized that the boy himself is both the subject and the Rückenfigur . So now I ask whether the picture needs the window and the idea of your presence intervening? Would it work better with just one Rückenfigur , just the boy? What would the picture be mean without that window?

So, yes, this is an interesting picture which can be impressive.

Thanks for sharing and bearing with me on my ideas of the picture and what it might mean to us.

Asher
 
Last edited:

Jim Galli

Member
...a couple for you:

Discovery.jpg

discovery

DirtyDancing.jpg

dirty dancing

Caedon and Jonah are my grandsons. They do not suffer from nature deficit disorder. Nevada is still a wonderful place to be a kid.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Jim,

I hate "Wow!" comments. Still the first picture is of wonder and the second, (and certainly for any grandfather), simply wonderful. That last picture induces a joy in us as we see these kinds having fun playing with the sand and each other They're free of any demands, necessities or standards. Just free! Beauty is seeing that in children.

Asher
 

doug anderson

New member
Hi Doug,

This picture is at first just a boy alone on a dock, head down, resting on the open fence. Maybe he's staring down at the water below. It's not a particularly well executed picture technically, as it seems cluttered. Despite this shortcoming, maybe because one lone boy is a sympathetic figure, we look again.

I started to think how this ordinary humble picture might have become more important to me than my quick first glance assumed. I think this is an example of where the picture encourages us to look further than what is shown. In viewing any non-scientific picture, one can bring to it our own ideas, intelligence, knowledge, imagination and fancy. It does not have to be logical or the true to any facts. Now your picture's reception is no longer just about your intent. To the extent that there's obvious meaning or coded esthetics, we'll get that, of course. There's a wooden dock, a boy is there resting his head on a beam, there's water behind him and so forth. However, we can do much more with our reasoning and imagination. So we we get to have our own say as to the meaning of your photograph!

I like the view through the window which pulls us back from just seeing the boy alone on the dock. Rather we are there from a little distance back, separated by the bars of the window. This separation qualifies our involvement to one of contemplation. The window not only separates us from the picture but, encodes for us the information that you, the photographer, is positioned, back towards us, photographing the scene in front of you and also in front of us.

This extra feeling reminds me of the impressive and grand iconic work of Caspar David Friedrich, who used an actual figure, from behind which we observe the scene he is also contemplating. This figure is called the Rückenfigur .


Caspar_David_Friedrich_032.jpg


Deutsch: Der Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer
English: The wanderer above the sea of fog
Français : Le Voyageur contemplant une mer de nuages

Caspar David Friedrich 1818. So the painting is more than 70 years old and so "Public Domain" is asserted in Wikipedia, here.


You, looking at the boy, constitutes a kind of virtual Rückenfigur. This just is my own, perhaps novel, extension of that concept. In the Friedrich's Wanderer Above the Sea we are confronted by the obviously placed observer. We are pretty certain he is contemplating what he sees. So we do the same.

Here in your picture we're signaled to consider "What's going on?", "What happened?", "What will happen next?" or "Where are the other children?" Is he staring at the water, tired, bored, lost or abandoned? So your picture becomes more about "consideration" than simple "perception", i.e. merely reading as to what is present.

You may have realized that the boy himself is both the subject and the Rückenfigur . So now I ask whether the picture needs the window and the idea of your presence intervening? Would it work better with just one Rückenfigur , just the boy? What would the picture be mean without that window?

So, yes, this is an interesting picture which can be impressive.

Thanks for sharing and bearing with me on my ideas of the picture and what it might mean to us.

Asher

Asher, thanks for the thoughtful response. You've got me thinking about cinema, now, and in particular the kind of shot where, for example, there is a person being watched, and we become aware of the watcher when the leaves in the foreground move -- although that kind of shot is usually sinister. I like theatricality in photography and instinctively look for it.

Best,

Doug
 

Jon Mark

New member
Faux Monkey! :)

Jacob%2028months-36-Edit.jpg


Never thought my two-year old could climb into the tree in our backyard. Managed to snap a few before running over and helping him down. He found the sight of me running over to him very entertaining. Now he makes a bee line to the tree each time we go out.

Used my 70-200L IS and ISO 500 1/100 and f 5.6

Appreciate any comments about exposure, composition, etc.
 
Top