I doubt it. The latest strategy announcements from Ricoh suggest a concentration of the camera range into a few core, high-spec DSLR offerings.

The market for high quality, very compact fixed lens or limited fixed zoom cameras has become very small I believe. Apart from the market segment that is dominated by the Sony mirrorless models I think there's little room to maneuver outside of this.

Thanks also Mike, I'm glad you saw it, and thanks Maria for the reassurance! I have a number of similar shots so I will certainly process them with some differing amounts of softening to compare.

Yes, the umbrella loses much more light than a softbox, due to it being reflected back rather than straight forwards through the box, so I guess the extra power from the umbrella was needed to balance that of the softbox. You're exactly right, its a trial and experimenting thing. I often play around before any live subject comes along, with a doll or teddy bear, and try out a few different lighting balances ....inevitable I find myself trying to create a more contrasty look across the face from one side to the other. Its usually easiest to get the 'Main' exposure correct .... the 'Fill' one is open to a lot of creative interpretation.

PS ... I meant that I play around with the flashes and power settings, not the dolls and teddy bears

Yes I think the blown highlights are the same in both shots. I think its probably beyond software recovery really, it just needs consideration when shooting next time so that the correct exposure value is set for the sky.

A lot of people here swear by the ''underexpose for highlights / raise shadows in post'' method, assuming you have a camera that can cope with that well. Otherwise its the filters at capture point to re-balance the brightness of sky and ground .... or if using a tripod then multiple exposures at different brightnesses can be shot, in order to combine or blend them with layers in Photoshop., or an HDR processing technique.

Thanks Gareth, I'm glad you like the lighting, and I'm sure that's a fair point about the softening .... no doubt its one of those 'marmite' type of things that some will love and others not ..... I did the softening process on a PS layer so I could have easily reduced it with the blend through of the original. 'Frequency separation' .... oooh, I like it

Well that's fine, isn't it? Looks to be plenty of power there .... you've certainly got a good balance between the flash exposure on you and the ambient brightness on the buildings behind. Obviously if you went much further with the shutter speed to get the sky further down then the flash might start to struggle, but you are testing it to extremes there with the full sun right behind.

Its good to see some successful off-camera HSS Radio flash!

Ahhh, insightful critique! I wouldn't have thought of that ... yes, the space does work rather well I think, even just for general compositional reasons.

Interesting that you have mixed ambient and flash Gareth, although I'm just confused by your description ..... it looks like its the flash coming in from the right of the subject as the 'Main' light, and the ambient is the fill ....or have I got it the wrong way round ?

That background is really complimentary, so much better than the horrible bright white ones we often see for this type of photography .... despite being a Dad I really can't stand that typical sort of fancy baby shot .... you know , the ones you see on calendars with a baby wedged into a flowerpot, or those icky 'skin on skin' ones with parents

But I like the supporting nature of the props in the first, which are nothing gimmicky, and you've take the trouble to choose similar colours that go with the skin tones and clothing.

I'm another one who doesn't like the colouring of the 2nd one, with the surrounds seeming to sap away any decent tones in the babies skin .... maybe it shouldn't be full colour, but I think a traditional standard mono look would be better. But the wrap around blanket is a lovely idea and the lighting brings out his little face beautifully

That's a striking and creative viewpoint in the 2nd one, well worth exploring more of that sort of angle on things .

I'm put off really by the highlight blow out on the skies, which don't look like you've done anything to control .... you could either expose correctly for the sky and raise the ground in processing, or (the traditional approach) use an ND Grad filter to balance the sky and ground.

No, lets hope that Peter's dog doesn't get bored with photography!

I second the comments about good expression and the depth and clarity to the focus and sharpness is very good. It looks like you've applied that suggestion to leave just one catchlight too Peter....?

There's a nice even spread of light, and with those 3 flashes you have really covered it all, so the effect is brighter and more upbeat than the previous 'noir' ones. Personally I prefer the higher contrast from those, with a stronger modelling effect, so I wonder if that could be achieved here with a higher ratio of power levels between the softbox & umbrella lights ....? As they are it looks like a similar output from both. Of course that's the beauty of lighting, you can choose exactly what you want, and some will like it one way, some the other way

These are really good! Some very effective small DOF and close in wide angles ..... are you using a K1?

I particularly like 2,3,11 & 15 for their overall presentation and impact. Also what lens were you using? In any case its all high quality stuff, a powerful flavour of the attraction.