Page 1 of 1

Baby pics (7 img) - D.U.W.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:51 am
by Aussie Dave
Had a chance this weekend to get the trusty D70 out and snap a few pics of the kids. It's been a while since I posted some images, so I thought I'd share these....

Unfortunately, 1 - 4 were taken in ISO1600 (whoops :(), though didn't come out too bad (IMO)

1. What you lookin' at Dad ?
Image

2. Dad, that's too close....
Image

3. Hmmm, what's that over there...?
Image

4. Are you gonna move, or what ?
Image

5. Mmmm...this is yummy....
Image

6. See, I told you I wouldn't make a mess...
Image

7. Should I play this piece in E minor...?
Image

C & C welcomed :)

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:04 am
by nito
I like all the shots dave. They have grown so fast! You should enter the shots in the cuties baby comp. $15000 scholarship on offer for the winner. :D

I am amazed that the shots turned out so well at ISO1600.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:33 pm
by stubbsy
Dave

A good group of pics (well maybe not the messy ones!). I agree with Nito - they've grown incredibly fast.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:42 pm
by Alpha_7
Some great shots, defintely no issues with anyone being camera shy in your house :)

For me #2 and #3 are my favourite shots, but it's a tough choice as they are all keepers and deserve a place in the album :)

The lighting is really nice is these shots, was it bounced flash ?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:47 pm
by BT*ist
Brilliant stuff (especially for ISO1600... I use that setting only reluctantly when the choice is between a photo and no photo at all). My favourite is #6 - close crop, great detail and clarity, priceless expression.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:55 pm
by Aussie Dave
Thanks for your comments guys.

The lighting in these was bounced flash (with the magical SB800).

I rarely point the flash directly at the subject, as the lighting from bouncing the flash is that much better.

I was bummed when I saw the ISO was on 1600, but when I uploaded the photos onto the PC, they were'nt bad at all. Obviously, if they had been underexposed I'm sure they wouldn't have looked as good.

Admittedly, I did run a couple of the ISO1600 shots through Neat Image, to lessen the noise a touch....but they weren't as bad as what you'd first think.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 3:15 pm
by Willigan
Great series Dave (my wife is pregnant with our first, so I'm a sucker for kid shots) & the high ISO doesn't seem to have affected them. Keep them coming :)