Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Kate - The Photographer  (Read 46020 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Lady Adelaide

Ginormous Member
***********

Reputation: 1096

Offline Offline

Switzerland Switzerland

Posts: 7384





Ignore
« Reply #120 on: May 06, 2018, 05:04:30 PM »



Logged
Eliza B

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 776

Online Online

United States United States

Posts: 2720





Ignore
« Reply #121 on: May 06, 2018, 05:11:05 PM »

They're lovely pictures.  Obviously done by an amateur photographer and that's fine.

I just don't get with her fancy camera why the clarity is not great.  

I love taking photos of my newborn, well 4 months now. i haven't taken a photography class since high school,  and with my camera phone I get better clarity which is odd as she has a great nikon.  Also the best advice i got for photographing babies is to make sure the nose is not up-lit.  A quick swivel of the chair makes a huge difference.
Logged
pixiecat
Board Helper
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 5449

Offline Offline

Cuba Cuba

Posts: 33095


Pixiecat loves to Dish!




Ignore
« Reply #122 on: May 06, 2018, 05:25:56 PM »

One thing that is good about Kate’s photos is that nobody has half their face cut out, or is shuffled off to the side so a vase of flowers is the focal point (even though the photo is intended to be of the child on their birthday). She’s a thousand times more talented than Mary in that regard. I don’t mind the blurry background as long as the child is clear.
Logged
Maria
Administrator
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 3780

Offline Offline

Posts: 20557




« Reply #123 on: May 06, 2018, 08:15:36 PM »

One thing that is good about Kate’s photos is that nobody has half their face cut out, or is shuffled off to the side so a vase of flowers is the focal point (even though the photo is intended to be of the child on their birthday). She’s a thousand times more talented than Mary in that regard. I don’t mind the blurry background as long as the child is clear.

This.

Also no horses are present and Kate is not trying (too hard at least) to be artistic. Win win.
Logged
Olya

Large Member
******

Reputation: 379

Offline Offline

Posts: 1247





Ignore
« Reply #124 on: May 06, 2018, 10:48:15 PM »

They're lovely pictures.  Obviously done by an amateur photographer and that's fine.

I just don't get with her fancy camera why the clarity is not great.  

I love taking photos of my newborn, well 4 months now. i haven't taken a photography class since high school,  and with my camera phone I get better clarity which is odd as she has a great nikon.  Also the best advice i got for photographing babies is to make sure the nose is not up-lit.  A quick swivel of the chair makes a huge difference.

What does that mean that the "nose is not up-lit"? Too much light focusing on the nose?
Logged
Lady Lurker

Mini Member
***

Reputation: 78

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 213





Ignore
« Reply #125 on: May 06, 2018, 11:37:11 PM »

I'm sure she is a sweet little girl but I honestly don't see the adorableness. Maybe I'm missing something though, I just think she's a bit weird looking. She's got an odd mouth and weird smile, and puffy baggy eyes.

The queen mum was a gorgeous little girl but a rather unattractive moon faced mean old snob as an adult so I hope char grows into her looks as an older child/teen/adult instead of the reverse.

Lizardcandy, you have an interesting way with words. a rather unattractive moon faced mean old snob as an adult Very descriptive. I love it. No beating around the bush.  Star

I think Char is an ok looking child.  Like many, it is her personality and animation that transform her.  I do think they could spring for a sweater/cardigan that fits.
Logged
Laprincess

Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 1478

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 11782





Ignore
« Reply #126 on: May 07, 2018, 12:11:52 AM »

I just don't get with her fancy camera why the clarity is not great.  

These photos are not clear because Kate was trying to be artistic. She used a very shallow depth of field to create the blurry background (the bokeh effect) but she didn't focus on the right thing. In the lone baby photo, I would have focused on the baby's eyes/face from the front. In the photo with Charlotte, I would have focused on either the kiss or Charlotte's hand holding the baby since the baby's eyes were closed and thus, not very interesting. Instead, she focused on the chin of the baby in the former photo and baby's ear in the latter photo. Kate either didn't have the artistic eyes to know where to focus or her eye sight isn't good enough to get the focus right. It's a waste of money for her to use a fancy camera. A cell phone camera would have found the baby's face and focused automatically. It would have been a better photo.

This is a photo where the focus was done right with a DSLR camera and it's a much better photo:


« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 12:26:50 AM by Laprincess » Logged
Kaiserin

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1836

Offline Offline

Germany Germany

Posts: 4291





Ignore
« Reply #127 on: May 07, 2018, 06:48:15 PM »

I don't think Kate did anything more than just arrange the kids on the sofa/pillow and then snap,
using the automatic camera programme to do all the rest.

 Whistle
Logged
Eliza B

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 776

Online Online

United States United States

Posts: 2720





Ignore
« Reply #128 on: May 07, 2018, 07:34:52 PM »

They're lovely pictures.  Obviously done by an amateur photographer and that's fine.

I just don't get with her fancy camera why the clarity is not great.  

I love taking photos of my newborn, well 4 months now. i haven't taken a photography class since high school,  and with my camera phone I get better clarity which is odd as she has a great nikon.  Also the best advice i got for photographing babies is to make sure the nose is not up-lit.  A quick swivel of the chair makes a huge difference.

What does that mean that the "nose is not up-lit"? Too much light focusing on the nose?

The angle of the light shouldn't be going up their nostrils but casting a little shadow underneath.   
Logged
Olya

Large Member
******

Reputation: 379

Offline Offline

Posts: 1247





Ignore
« Reply #129 on: May 07, 2018, 08:02:37 PM »

They're lovely pictures.  Obviously done by an amateur photographer and that's fine.

I just don't get with her fancy camera why the clarity is not great.  

I love taking photos of my newborn, well 4 months now. i haven't taken a photography class since high school,  and with my camera phone I get better clarity which is odd as she has a great nikon.  Also the best advice i got for photographing babies is to make sure the nose is not up-lit.  A quick swivel of the chair makes a huge difference.

What does that mean that the "nose is not up-lit"? Too much light focusing on the nose?

The angle of the light shouldn't be going up their nostrils but casting a little shadow underneath.   

I see, thank you for explaining! Champagne
Logged
Margaret

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1221

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 3608





Ignore
« Reply #130 on: May 08, 2018, 01:28:05 AM »

I don't think Kate did anything more than just arrange the kids on the sofa/pillow and then snap,
using the automatic camera programme to do all the rest.

 Whistle

That's my guess, too.  And that would be perfectly fine but we have been fed that BS sycophancy about her being such a good photographer she could make a living out of it.  If they're going to feed us that stuff, Kate should lift her game.   
Logged
pixiecat
Board Helper
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 5449

Offline Offline

Cuba Cuba

Posts: 33095


Pixiecat loves to Dish!




Ignore
« Reply #131 on: May 08, 2018, 01:55:40 AM »

I don't think Kate did anything more than just arrange the kids on the sofa/pillow and then snap,
using the automatic camera programme to do all the rest.

 Whistle

That's my guess, too.  And that would be perfectly fine but we have been fed that BS sycophancy about her being such a good photographer she could make a living out of it.  If they're going to feed us that stuff, Kate should lift her game.   
More like the idiots who write that stuff need to stop it.  She's as talented (or not) as she's ever going to be.  We all know she isn't going to take a photography course.
Logged
Diamond Lil

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1007

Offline Offline

New Zealand New Zealand

Posts: 3965



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #132 on: May 08, 2018, 04:08:37 AM »

Kate is an average photographer with a good camera.  She takes passable photos, but she's no Annie Leibovitz. 
Logged

Laprincess

Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 1478

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 11782





Ignore
« Reply #133 on: May 08, 2018, 07:17:13 AM »

I don't think Kate did anything more than just arrange the kids on the sofa/pillow and then snap,
using the automatic camera programme to do all the rest.

 Whistle

It's true that some good cameras' Portrait setting can create the bokeh effect as well but I'm not sure all automatic would have messed up the focus like that. It would have found the faces and focused automatically.  Thinking

But one thing I said it before, Kate doesn't have the eyes to be a good photographer. Maddie does. Technique can be learned. The artistic eyes are born with. Anyone who knows anything about photography would know Kate just doesn't have it. Those a**kissers should stop. It's embarrassing.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: