Honest opinion

[SolaresLarrave]

I liked the first one at first glance... but then I found the second one better (more depth, I think, to the boy's face, as opposed to the documentary lighting in the first).

Since I tend to be impulsive at times, I voted for the first, but I wish I could change my vote. Oh, well...

 

[Ronald M]

#1 , the second is dark and flat

 

[Carlsen Highway]

You give us no more than the pictures themselves, and ask which ones we like better. This is a simple question and requires a simple answer.

I will say that the first one describes the subject but little more.

The second is interesting. It includes an interpretation.

Our answer may illuminate for the poster whether his intentions have been communicated.

 

[payasam]

First. Camera not looking upwards so much. The density of the second image is also not correct, but that is neither here nor there. I see no difference in the boy's expression, and the light seems to come from the same direction.

 

[Haigh]

Sam1 as he looks apprehensive in 2. Just my reaction.

 

[nobbylon]

ok thx for all the input on this.

 

[italy74]

The only real cons of the 2nd that I voted is the disturbing eye slightly out of focus.
In general I liked more the different lighting on his face

 

[johannielscom]

The first. Why? The intensity of the boy's eyes are distracting me on the 2nd print and drawing me in for the wrong reason -- perhaps I'm finding the expression unsettling and hard to look at? But definitely the 1st for me, gut instinct.

Funny: shot nr. 2 for the exact reason you find distracting Vicky: the boys intense gaze.

I like my shots somewhat unsettling. Shot nr.1 is too safe for me.

And: I'm happy to conclude I've yet again joined the minority 🙂

 

[E.M]

second photo, has more tones and I like the light in his eye. Also composition is better.

http://www.etiennemichiels.com

 

[matt335]

the first cause of the nicer lighting around his eyes and nose

 

[aizan]

the second one has shadows from his hands crossing the chin and rising above his shoulder, and the light source is coming from a lower angle. someone said horror movie lighting. bingo.

i like the first one more, as far as family photo albums go.

 

[tim_c]

The second picture is intriguing and the first is boring. I really couldn't care less about tonal graduation or family albums.

 

[JPSuisse]

OK, so if we leave out content and framing, as the poster of the thread asked, what is left? Lighting, texture, tonality?

On these points, I go clearly with the first. The tonality is insufficient to even see the outline of the boy's face on the second shot.

JP

 

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

My vote for #1, because it somehow feels more "natural"
(I almost could say that #1 is film, #2 is digital... If I am wrong, I will keep my vote!).
Cheers,
Rui
AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY

 

[andydrew]

1st one. His skin looks better, more natural. In the second it looks too flawlessly polished and unreal.

 

[dave lackey]

The first one is...well, boring.

The second one is more interesting.

Depends on what you like/want in the image.

 

[Turtle]

both very different. Prefer first overall as more literal and honest. #2 feels more 'worked' to me with a conflicting feel to it.

 

[crawdiddy]

I voted Sam1, because I think it's technically better. But I actually think Sam2 is more interesting because it has some drama. Sam1 looks static by comparison.

Nobbylon, this is an interesting exercise.