I have about 175-200 (but who's counting?!) photos that are decent from a fashion show fundraiser I photographed this past weekend. Originals are pretty underexposed, but surprisingly, DPP curves brightened them up nicely...or so I thought before I played with one in photoshop.
So, I'm bringing this example to you, along with my dilemma, for your expert opinions and advice. First, the processed comparables (please ignore motion blur in hand):
Exif: Canon XSi, 0.01 sec (1/100), f/2.8, 50 mm, 400 ISO, No flash
Spotlight on subject, with some overhead ceiling lights on behind me in back of gym.
Digital Photo Professional - RGB curves assist, increased brightness
Photoshop Version - Levels, Curves, Brightness/Contrast, Shadow/Highlight, Lab Levels, Sharpen/Dodge/Burn eyes & lips:
My questions:
Which do you like best? Why?
Does the PS one pop like a fashion show photo should? ...Come close?...or Haha, yea right!?
Does one seem to have more depth / is less "flat" looking?
What would you do differently in either of these programs to improve the results?
Suggestions on how I could process the batch faster than individually in photoshop?!
Okay, so now my dilemma: A friend of mine asked me to take the photos, and asked what I would charge for the 2-hr event; being an amateur and all, I suggested $25/hr + $25 for a CD of images, so $75; she came back w/ "the budget only allows for $50". So...okay, it's for a church fundraiser, whatever, I'm down.
I was thrilled, at first, when I got home and found DPP to process these babies (again, 200 +/-) with a click of a button or two. But, the more I stare at them, the flatter they look.
So, should I (would you?!) spend a week processing all these pics in photoshop to give her the absolutely best looking images I can, or should I just give her what's done and be done w/ it?
PS: Based on the ones she's seen (many of them on flickr
here), she's quite happy with them. I just know they
could be better.
Thanks for any and all input. Please critique away!