D40 Try at a Portrait

[Scampi]

Here's a portrait with a bit of PP'ing. I'm definitely not good at Photoshop, so I'm just playing, but I think much more could be done to this portrait. Part of the problem is that the quality and angle of light was not so good for a portrait. The lighting here brought out too much of the skin's texture, thus not flattering the model (I blurred it out a bit to soften the harsher texture in the original). No make-up on the subject, no reflector. On the other hand, this was a snapshot with the Nikon D40, handheld, on the fly, although manual, to test it out, and I think it performed well: EXIF: Nikon D40, ISO 200, 55mm, 1/60, f/5.6, with Kit Lens (18-55mm).




One thing I am considering is buying the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D AF. From all accounts it is a wonderfully sharp lens, great for portraiture, even if I'll have to focus manually on that one.

Thanks, (if you know of any good Photoshop (or Lightroom) tips for post-processing portraits, let me know?

Scampi

[odark30]

Scampi,
Typically, whiten the teeth a bit-brighten the eyes, perhaps a bit of surface blur. I don't like to go for the full on "glamour shots" like removing every flaw, etc. Most people like the way they look glamourized but then I think in 50 years will someone say "what did granny-gramps REALLY look like?" LOL

[wulf]

I don't know that a 50mm lens would have made that much improvement; you have her face quite reasonably sharp (and going sharper means revealing every tiny wrinkle, which the subject may or may not find flattering... ).

I think this is quite a good portrait anyway and a good example of what can be done with the kit lens. However, you could perhaps have made some alterations in positioning. For example, there is a lot of space to the right of her head, including a very light patch. A little rotation of the camera and perhaps moving her a touch to the left could have had denser foliage, as shown on the left hand side, which is a better backdrop.

You could also perhaps had your model face more towards the right of the frame but with her eyes looking towards the left. This would give a bit more indication of the shape of her face.

Wulf

[subrataofkris]

Hi Scampi,

I put Orton Effect in your shot in PS and dodged the background highlights.

[akshatrathi294]

Originally Posted by odark30

Scampi,
Typically, whiten the teeth a bit-brighten the eyes, perhaps a bit of surface blur. I don't like to go for the full on "glamour shots" like removing every flaw, etc. Most people like the way they look glamourized but then I think in 50 years will someone say "what did granny-gramps REALLY look like?" LOL

I like this better. Makes a nice portrait.

[brianfarrell]

It all depends on how far you want to go... you can eventually end up painting an entirely new face on the same bone structure... eyes sharpened and whitened. teeth whitened, skin smoothed, face slightly desaturated, background blurred. But is it the same person? Discuss

(I think this topic actually has already been discussed somewhere on here...)

[kunaldaswani]

Hey,

I don't normally edit and repost without permission. But since everyone is giving a a shot at this one im going to as well.

Just played with the Curves and added a touch of unsharp mask to make the image "pop". Nothing else. I feel every digital image needs a lil PS (Not too much) just to make it pop.



Also looks nice in BW:

[Scampi]

Thanks all, I don't mind the attempts at other processing. I learn quite a lot from what other folks try out. I think the issue of how much and when does it stop being the person is an interesting one. At times more than others. I’m inclined to minimalism in close face portraits, post-processing tight portraits like this primarily for softening a bit of the skin tone and removing any obvious blemishes that are not natural to the face (say a major pimple). Having said that however, I took another shot in which the texture of the skin pops out more. I think it is a compelling shot, and the “realism” adds “character,” but it is not very flattering. I’ll try all these effects and see how it all fares. Thanks for the tips. Wulf, you are right. Thanks for the tips about positioning. I was moving around some, but was too focused on the subject’s face, and not the background. Typical mistake of not really looking at the frame fully!

Thanks all,

Scampi

[jiminyClickit]

Scampi,

While trying out some other looks, notice the difference between face and neck tone: in every one of these, it's different, even in black and white. If you started over with your original, I'd address that first. The one you posted could look better if just the face area were desaturated till it matched the neck. Do eyes and teeth separate, as 0dark30 shows. Good shot, basically.