Another shot from Katie's Senior Portrait Shoot

[roostabunny]

50mm
f/3.2
1/200
400 ISO

She loves this shot, her parents love this shot. I love this shot.

Katie and her folks don't want the shots to look over processed, and my question is, does this processing look natural? I think so, but I'm also motivated to call this one "done" so I don't trust myself at the moment. So give it to me straight. I'm willing to dive back in if needed.

Thanks!

[zona5101]

she seems too cool (color temperature not hipness
I think there is a little green bias in her hair.

[utsc2006]

She looks very blue on my calibrated screen. I'd adjust WB. Cute shot though

[sk66]

To me it looks underexposed, the WB is "off", and it's a bit pixelated. (did you do a lot of sharpening? Was it very underexposed?)
But it's a nice shot and worth "saving".

I copied the image into PS and adjusted the levels...this corrected WB but also caused the highlights to blow out a bit...So I "went with it".
Duplicated to new layer and added 2px gaussian blur. Erased from subject and set to screen.

Duplicated original again, moved it to the top of stack, changed mode to "normal", and did an exposure adjustment; mostly adjusting gamma for that "washed out" feel. Reduced opacity (around 35% maybe) Erased it from her face.

I wasn't as careful as I would have been if it were my image...I think a bit more/less erasing of the gamma layer is in order. (it's adding most of the softness to her arm/pants etc and making her head seem a bit odd)

Maybe give it a try, you could probably do better, or even come up with a different approach.
If working from RAW, you probably have more options here.

[roostabunny]

Originally Posted by sk66

To me it looks underexposed, the WB is "off", and it's a bit pixelated. (did you do a lot of sharpening? Was it very underexposed?)
But it's a nice shot and worth "saving".

Thanks for all the great comments, you guys!

I saw that pixelization in my post, and it puzzles the heck out of me. Here's about a 150% crop of the image -



I mean right? So, maybe it's the program I'm using to resize my images for DPS. Not sure. But the actual image is crisp.

Regarding exposure, I think you're right on, but I totally did that in post. I'm going all nuts trying to get a tone in the grass that I got in another shot, and I kept making the image darker and darker and darker. Clearly went overboard, and then didn't bother to mask her out of some of that darkening. It was shot in RAW, so, yes, I have tons of flexibility in that area.

I guess same goes for WB, and I agree with everyone there as well. Bruce has already put up with me bellyaching about my cheapo monitors, but re-looking at it now, it seems lame to blame the screen - I can see the blue. I'll post back a corrected one in a bit, and hopefully it won't be all pixelated

[graciousness]

Hey I love that super cropped photo of her face! A bit reminiscent of the film days and noise.....

I'd do something about that photo and show it to them if I were you

In regards to the original, it does look pixelated in mine, too. I would prefer for her face to just be a little lighter and that's it, really.

Great job

[roostabunny]

Originally Posted by graciousness

Hey I love that super cropped photo of her face! A bit reminiscent of the film days and noise.....

I'd do something about that photo and show it to them if I were you

In regards to the original, it does look pixelated in mine, too. I would prefer for her face to just be a little lighter and that's it, really.

Great job

Thanks so much, Graciousness! I'm not familiar with that film title. Couldn't find it on IMDB either, but I'm curious. Despite my belief in the sharpness and clarity of the original photo, even I was surprised how interesting that crop looked.

Hey a little off-topic for all of you - I'm convinced now that I need to start saving for a new monitor. Some minimal research has taught me that I need to be in the market for an IPS LCD. I will have to go toward the low end, but curious if anyone has any experience with the NEC EA231WMi-BK, HP ZR22w, or Viewsonic VP2365wb (all in the "just over $200" range) or other units with acceptable color accuracy in that price range. There's probably a better thread for that question - I'll look for that, too.

Also curious about entry-level calibration. Can I rent? How often do you calibrate? Are units not that expensive? What's the minimum to say I'm getting anything for my investment?

Thanks again!