P8_Kim

=Kim Huett=

// Back Porch //


__Tags__: porch, table, night, evening, chair, plant, girl, boy, hat, hug, siblings

Self Evaluation
(45-50 pts.) || 80 – 89% (40 - 44 pts.) || <80% (<40 pts.) || __Critique Comments__: Compositionally, I like the framing of this shot. However, I would prefer that there not be a tree in the upper right-hand corner. Perhaps bare screen-porch wall would have been better (less distracting, more stark). There are lots of details in the foreground: the kids’ faces, the details on the chair arm, and the hat are the primary attractions of this shot. .
 * ** Category ** || ** Strong ** || ** Adequate ** || ** Weak ** ||
 * ** Concept ** || Does an outstanding job of communicating the concept. || Does an adequate job communicating the concept . || Does a poor job communicating the concept. ||
 * ** Composition ** || Photograph uses composition principles very effectively. || Photograph does a good job using composition principles. || Photograph does a poor job using composition principles. ||
 * ** Focus ** || Focus is a perfect match with the concept of the shot . || Focus is an adequate match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is a poor match with the concept of the shot. ||
 * ** Technical Aspects ** || Shutter speed and aperture were perfectly chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were adequately chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were poorly chosen and do not match the concept. ||
 * ** Depth of Field ** || Excellent use of depth-of-field. || Adequate use of depth-of-field. || Poor use of depth-of-field. ||
 * ** Title/tags ** || Title and tags were perfectly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are excellent with no mistakes. || Title and tags were adequately chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are good with only minor errors. || Title and tags were poorly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Contains multiple spelling errors or wrong word choices. ||
 * ** Instructor evaluates this section ** ||
 * ** Self Critique ** || Excellent self-assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate self-assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor self-assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * ** Peer Critique ** || Excellent peer assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate peer assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor peer assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * ** Peer Comments ** || Peer comments exceed expectations. || Peer comments meet expectations. One or two comments might be missing. || Three or more peer comments were missing, incomplete or poorly written. ||
 * ** Total Points ** || >89%
 * ** Total Points ** || >89%

I used the Night Portrait setting for this shot. The light on the back porch was very dim, but looking at this shot, it would appear that the light was much brighter. The recommendation on my camera is that I am no closer than 6 feet from the subject. Getting closer gives the subject too much flash. I think I was about 6 feet away.

The children’s faces look bright and somewhat pearly (compared to their true complexions), and this has less to do with the camera settings and more to the manipulations I was trying in Gimp. I applied a number of filters and techniques (undoing many along the way), and I am not sure what exactly we’re looking at at this point. I will say that given more time I would play with this more and try to create a more yellowy glow on their faces. As it is, it doesn’t match the warmth of the porch lighting. I think the focus is appropriate to the shot. The kids, who are the subject, are in excellent focus. I was able to zoom in and clone-stamp out the “Polo” icon on the boy’s shirt, which I felt was a distraction. The depth of field is appropriate. The chair and the children are in focus and the background is more blurred. I think this adds depth to the shot.

Because I was shooting in Night Portrait mode, the aperture and shutter were out of my control, but I think that they were appropriate to this shot, based on the outcome. The camera photosites were able to perceive enough detail based on the light from the overhead string of lights and the flash (aperture), and the shutter speed worked out as evidenced by lack of blur. I will say that many of the shots in this series did indeed have blur due to the wiggly nature of my subjects. My camera book advised that I tell my subjects to be very still, even after the shot was taken. In this shot, they were sufficiently still.

The tags are appropriate to the shot.

Peer Critique: Cathy Carpenter
This would make a good portrait shot as well because you see a lot of personality in the kids coming through. I like how the flash brought out the features of the subjects and let the warmth of the night come through in the background. (They remind me of a young Captain and Tenille - I think it's the hat!) I would add the tag 'siblings'. The focus and depth of field are very good and it is a pleasant and engaging photo to look at. The elements of the composition work well together to keep your eye moving within the picture. I liked the messy bangs, but I think I would have moved the hair off the chin as it is just a little distracting. I know it's hard, but if you could make the young boy look just a little more directly at the camera it would add that extra engagement and really make the photo that much better.

(45-50 pts.) || 80 – 89% (40 - 44 pts.) || <80% (<40 pts.) || __Critique Comments__:
 * ** Category ** || ** Strong ** || ** Adequate ** || ** Weak ** ||
 * ** Concept ** || Does an outstanding job of communicating the concept. || Does an adequate job communicating the concept. || Does a poor job communicating the concept. ||
 * ** Composition ** || Photograph uses composition principles very effectively. || Photograph does a good job using composition principles. || Photograph does a poor job using composition principles. ||
 * ** Focus ** || Focus is a perfect match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is an adequate match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is a poor match with the concept of the shot. ||
 * ** Technical Aspects ** || Shutter speed and aperture were perfectly chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were adequately chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were poorly chosen and do not match the concept. ||
 * ** Depth of Field ** || Excellent use of depth-of-field. || Adequate use of depth-of-field. || Poor use of depth-of-field. ||
 * ** Title/tags ** || Title and tags were perfectly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are excellent with no mistakes. || Title and tags were adequately chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are good with only minor errors. || Title and tags were poorly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Contains multiple spelling errors or wrong word choices. ||
 * ** Instructor evaluates this section ** ||
 * ** Self Critique ** || Excellent self-assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate self-assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor self-assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * ** Peer Critique ** || Excellent peer assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate peer assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor peer assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * ** Peer Comments ** || Peer comments exceed expectations. || Peer comments meet expectations. One or two comments might be missing. || Three or more peer comments were missing, incomplete or poorly written. ||
 * ** Total Points ** || >89%
 * ** Total Points ** || >89%