We’re not sure if this is a baby bump photo, or if this couple is just really fond of onions…
← Previous post
Next post →
this one really doesnt belong here… the couple is trying to say their baby is the size of an onion at week 17…this was a FAIL on the part of this website for not knowing what you are looking at.
or, it could be here for the totally missed focus, poor DoF, and horrible baby reference choice.
It’s obvious from the “week 17” that they’re saying that the baby is the size of an onion you genius. The vast !majority of photos on this site definitely deserve to be here but this one does not. This a post is an example of snobbery in the photography world.
Ohh i see, I didn’t understand the onion before. Actually the shot is a bit meh but the idea is quite good, especially if it’s a series of different fruit and veg 🙂
It’s not the concept of the onion being relative to the size of the baby
That i have a problem with…..it’s the fact they chose an onion to represent their baby.
Just seems kinda weird to me.
Sure, the concept was good, but the execution was not.
Focus is still off,and depth of field is still poor.
Fine for grandma snapping a quick pic, not so much
for someone watermarking the photo with their business logo.
When you’re pregnant some books and apps will tell you, week by week the size of the baby, often comparing it to fruits/food etc. a lentil, a lemon, a grapefruit etc. But tbh, I’ve never heard of a fetus being compared to the size of an onion either lol! Maybe it’s from a country where they just love onions!
It’s not great photography but it’s unfair to classify something as fauxtography just because it’s less than stellar. This site is supposed to be the worst of the worst and this photo is far from that.
I don’t completely disagree there.
On the other hand…when you watermark your images with a business logo, people assume you are a business, and therefore (hopefully)
Professionally qualified to be as such.
I don’t the particular situation here, but if I had paid money for this, I would be upset. Of course, if this is indicative of the photographers body of work, I would not have hired them to begin with.
Granted, this is not horrible..but it is far from what someone stamping a photography business logo on their pictures should be producing.
I agree this photo is fine.
NO! Layers. Onions have layers. Babies have layers… You get it? They both have layers.
Oh, they both have LAYERS. Oh. You know, not everybody like onions. CAKE! Everybody loves cake! Cakes have layers!
You know what ELSE everybody likes? Parfaits! Have you ever met a person, you say, “Let’s get some parfait,” they say, “Hell no, I don’t like no parfait.”? Parfaits are delicious!
NO! You dense, irritating, miniature beast of burden! babies are like onions! End of story! Bye-bye! See ya later.
It doesn’t appear that the focus was really missed- her fingers are sharp, though the onion itself might be *slightly* oof. I think this would be totally fine in a series showing the size progression of baby, but by itself, it’s odd with the onion. Even so, they maybe should have picked some kind of fruit instead. This isn’t fauxtography. The colors, exposure, dof, focus are all fine.
There is an app that show the size of your baby each week in comparison to a fruit or veggie. They are surely just using those and making their own series of shots with them. I think it is an adorable idea. The fruit and veggies don’t HAVE to be representative of a baby. It’s purely comparing the size of the growing baby to something that everybody knows the size of and usually has in their home. I’ve actually seen a lot of people (mainly on FB) using the weekly tracker app that compares sizes to the fruits/veggies.
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.