What’s Your Preference?

majac · #1 (**permalink**) 07-07-2010, 10:14 AM

hi, after my last disasterous attempt, I have tried again. THIS TIME, i didnt go mad with photoshop. Any suggestions would be great. PS. i took everyones advise from my last attempt and only edited the basics. thanks in advance.

Picture 1.
Canon 50d
f. 5.6
1/1000
ISO 100
50mm 1.8 lens

Picture 2.
Canon 50d
f/1.8
1/250
ISO 100
50mm 1.8 lens

majac · #2 (**permalink**) 07-07-2010, 10:16 AM

i know theres shadow in the hair on the first picture. I didnt see it when i first took the shot.

BigFuzzy · #3 (**permalink**) 07-07-2010, 11:02 AM

Hi Majac, I remember your 1st post and, yeah, i was one of those guys that went after you for over doing it. I hope I've been forgiven?

I can say right away that both are an improvement over first one.
Now I'll get into each one specifically.
Photo 1.
Yes, you notice the shadow.. it's easy to get lost in the details and forget the basics isn't it?

There are two main issues I have with this otherwise nice photo.
1. Skin smoothing. Yes, it's much better than the last one, but it's still very obvious to me and I think the reason is that there's a noticeable (to me) difference between the face and the skin of her arms.
2. The pose. It blocks part of her face and it feels too posed for me. The 2nd image feels much more natural.
You've used the available light nicely. Did you use a fill light on this.
All in all a pretty good portrait that I still think it a bit too 'skin smoothed'.. I'm curious as to why you feel you need to use this? Is it because you see it done in fashion magazines all the time? Many many people (including big time earners in the industry), but I'm not a fan of it, especially when it's obvious. Her skin doesn't seem to need it.
Eyes are nicely lit and she has a relaxed (if posed) facial expression.

Photo 2
great pose. Nice relaxed face. Good use of f/1.8. Good use of back light even though some will feel that the highlights are a bit blown. This is where the use of flash (or a reflector) would come in handy as you'd be able to light her face and not overexpose the ambient/background light. Still, I like it.

Sadly, again, i think you overdid it with her. And, as you may note, I'm picky on the skin smoothing stuff, so ignore me if you want. The skin smoothing, which I think you applied to the whole image (?) has affected other parts of the image. Her wrist has lots of digital artifacts and noise which are the result of post-processing efforts, and her left (right to us) jaw line has some other digital splotches which I think are the results of your PP efforts.

To me, the PP on the skin makes the work you did on her eyes stand out even more. The whites of the left eye (her right) particularly looks worked on whereas her left (to our right) looks pretty nice.

It's still a good shot in many ways, I just think the skin-work PPing is too much/obvious. I'd love to see the original to see if it really was needed. This was really close to being a great shot for me as it's right up my alley in terms of approach (50mm & f/1.8

Despite me being harsh on you, lots of improvement, keep shooting (and posting!).

Al
PS pretty girls by the way!

Swisstony10 · #4 (**permalink**) 07-07-2010, 11:32 AM

I definitely prefer the pose and composition of the second shot. The PP is still a little heavy-handed for my liking. There are obvious blobs that suggest slightly clumsy clone-stamping - try reducing the opacity of the brush when you clone-stamp, and be really careful about where you take your clone from - faces are really good at having lots of subtle changes in tone over a short distance, that the eye doesn't necessarily register when you look at the picture, but if you take a clone from a tiny bit too far away from the area you're cloning into, the difference can actually be huge.

Like BigFuzzy, I'm not such a fan of skin smoothing. I've done it, sure - when I've been asked to, or when I was getting used to using Portrait Pro, but it's something that I think should be applied sparingly.

With that second image, the blown highlights that some would probably pick up on don't matter too much for me. If anything, they add to the picture a little.

The only thing that I'd change if it had been me shooting would've been to widen the depth of field very slightly. The face is lovely and sharp, but because you've shot wide open, the hair halfway to the back of her head is already out of focus. That's fine if you want that effect - and a lot of people do like/want it - but it's not something I like so much. It's entirely possible to have the subject's face and hair in focus and still throw the background out nicely.

But that's really just my opinion - I'm going by what I can see, and how I like my pictures to turn out.

Russ.

majac · #5 (**permalink**) 07-07-2010, 12:20 PM

I can see what you mean in the first shot with the pose not being so natural looking. Funny how you dont see it till someone actually points it out.

I didnt use fill light. I actually asked her to close her eyes and open them at the last second so she didnt sqwint. (sic)?
Ok, i pulled back on the skin smoothing, so my next attempt will be so minimal you will hardly notice it - I promise ( I must now promise myself too) haha.

the second photo - wrist. Now she has a really bad burn scar and for some reason it always comes up really strange in photos. the tatoos cover most of it. In real life its extremely shiney and very raised. I did to try get rid of some on the shine but I obviously made it worse.

I truely dont touch the whites of the eyes. every pic I have of her is the same and has been since she was tiny.

Big Fuzzy - even though Im not nearly there, Im glad Ive improved since my last terrible attempt. thanks for that and also for the suggestions.

I will try a flash next time and I'll also play around with Fstops.

No body is being harsh. I post my pics here to help me improve. And if I can take even one little thing people suggest into my next picture its a bonus.

majac · #6 (**permalink**) 07-07-2010, 12:33 PM

This pic any better? or should that be, "not as bad as last ones"?....
thanks for looking.

majac · #7 (**permalink**) 07-07-2010, 12:37 PM

Im off to re-evaluate. Will do a couple more pics and post them up tomorrow.
I will remember what everyone has said and put it into practice.
I really appreciate everyones comments

BigFuzzy · #8 (**permalink**) 07-07-2010, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by majac

This pic any better? or should that be, "not as bad as last ones"?....
thanks for looking.

Yep, already much better in my opinion. !

Also, i think that you should look into things like spot healing instead of general skin smoothing. This way you address those parts you really don't like while not messing with everything.