trc Loc: Logan, OH

This was taken last fall (2013) for a graduating senior who's mother was right there 'giving pointers'. The background needs a little work especially on the camera right side, admittedly, but just wanted to post this portrait to get comments.

Tom

Graduating Senior Portrait

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

I know it's much a matter of taste, but I feel you went a touch too far with skin smoothing in your processing, to the point were it appears strange and thereby distracting. After all, she's a young person with young person's skin - how much of wrinkle lines could she possibly have that need to be smoothed out so aggressively?

trc Loc: Logan, OH

I am quite aware of what you are saying and appreciate your comment. My question is from what perspective do we look at images and smoothing and blemish removal? I normally like to leave a little texture on skin and make them still look 'real' depending upon the subject and age. However, I have seen many images of females where their skin is smoothed out and blemish free to the point of professional models where their skin is basically picture perfect. Honestly, what perspective do we, or should we take when touching up a female's portrait?

The mother of this gal is quite attractive and she was looking for more of a glamour look for her daughter. Her daughter, by the way, is quite an archer and has won many awards and medals. Maybe her mom wants her to be more feminine looking because of that? I really don't know. What does one do; what does the photographer do; where does one draw the line; does one make the mother happy and do what she wants?

Should there be, or are there already, guidelines for retouching skin and complexion based on age? Skin should be smoothed or reworked based on age groups such as baby/newborn, 5-13, teens, 20-30, 30-40, 40-50, 50 and above? I am not being sarcastic whatsoever, but merely posing a sincere question for guidelines on skin and complexion smoothing.

Perhaps we should make groupings for unmarried women, professional models, actresses, magazine photos, married women over 40 or 50, and senior citizens. This is a question that comes up in my mind all the time when looking at female portraits. Society tends to promote the younger, blemish free, wrinkle free female look. In fact, people on television whether newscasters or daily and weekly shows or in movies all seem to be airbrushed automatically. Even men's faces are airbrushed and given a more youthful look. I'm not sure there are any acceptable criteria set in stone - Hmmm?

PalePictures Loc: Traveling

Tom,
Really busy at the moment but I wanted to chime in.

You will hear Cliff say this repeatedly. Bare arms up front are almost never a good idea. There is a lot of arm here. It is somewhat dominant.

You have a light imbalance in the eyes. One of the whites is much brighter. This is usually a sign of post processing or just bad light. Light in the eyes should match the light on the face. In my portraits I am all about light balance.

Retouching is ok. I would go with more blemish correction than smoothing on a portrait like this. There is an order to things in retouching. More blemish removal and less smoothing is almost always better.

Pose is a bit odd.

Keep up the hard work. Your results will improve. Great subject!

Russ

twillsol Loc: St. Louis, MO

This site is a really great site to get some great feedback. But, often, the one's commenting, get their personnel feelings involved. The most important person to satisfy is the Client. I learned this long ago. Have fixed some photos to my specifications only to get feedback from my client that I went too far. One of them even wanted to leave in the skin blemish.
Make your client happy.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

Nobody is picking on the original poster. These comments are made to help make Tom a better portrait photographer. Russ is correct, the first thing that I noticed was her arm. Walk away from the photo or turn around, then quickly look back at the photo, the arm just jumps out. Not only is it the bare skin, which in my opinion a young, thin person can get away with "sometimes", but I'm not sure if your lens was too wide or what, but her arm seems disproportionate. The whitening of the eyes should be subtle, it looks like one eye was done and one wasn't. if you are going to select the whites of the eyes, then select both eyes and do the same thing to each eye at the same time, so you don't end up with one super white eye, and one gray eye.

As for the other question, I always err on doing as little as possible with skin smoothing. The client can always ask you to do more, which is fine. If you smooth someone's skin out too much, you could make them wonder "what is so wrong with my face that he had to change it so much?" I know this, because it was a mistake I made a few times when I first moved to digital. I'm not on calibur of Russ or Captain C, but I do a lot of portraits and weddings, and have seen a LOT of what works and what doesn't, (and how you can really make a young girl feel self conscious)

You have a very good foundation, keep it up, and take the suggestions to heart.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

I have to agree with the poster above who commented on the pose. It looks to me as if the girl is going to fall over backward any minute now. She doesn't look comfortable even though she is smiling for the camera.

While I agree about pleasing the client to an extent the client probably knows nothing about lighting the scene. Perhaps putting the girl in a pose is up to the client but certainly the photographer is getting paid because of his/her skills as a photographer not to do exactly what the client wants. The client wants a certain type of photo. After that I think it is up to the photographer.

Dennis

trc Loc: Logan, OH

Russ,

Thanks for all the great feedback. I have heard Cliff comment on bare arms a bunch as well. The mother wanted her dressed as she is and also 'chose' the pose. She thinks she is a good photographer and so the client is right - correct? I was expecting the gal to come much differently - hah! Her mom had her bring all kinds of archery medals and trophies. Not at all what I thought was going to be! She also works where my wife works - not good usually.

I remember from your videos about the lighting being even and must make that a priority when processing. I actually did this several months ago and then used Portraiture a try for the first time last night having read your & Bobby's discussion. I like it, but need to learn it and learn your soften method as shown on your video.

I'm working since early morning and on the road. I trust it's a go for me to get tickets and a room? I never really heard anything that seemed official? If you know, please inform me and I'll do it later today when I get back home. Thanks for everything.

Tom

twillsol Loc: St. Louis, MO

I agree Dennis.

trc Loc: Logan, OH

bkyser,

All your comments are well done. The trouble with posting a picture is that people see the image but have no inkling of the background behind it. Putting it into words and being there for the shoot are two completely different scenarios.

I know better about the whitening of the eyes and blemishes and sharpening an image. I overlooked the eyes and honestly did not concentrate on much other than her skin tone and softness/texture. When I really get down to adjusting portrait images, a soft touch is better than brute force simply like flying a plane or a helicopter or actually like running a floor buffer or polisher or a power trowel when finishing concrete. Many, many people way overdue their corrections when just a little is needed - sometimes almost unnoticeable changes, and just a very little at a time. These are mistakes people learn through trial and error which I had done a long time ago. I did this in a BIG hurry and was just trying to kick something out and see what kind of comments I could get. I was not disappointed and appreciate everyone's critical critiques. You folks did not let me down - thank you. :-)

Now, for the pose and such. The subject's Mom was the ruling factor when I did this shoot. She is quite strong willed and thinks of herself as being a pretty good photographer of her kids in outside settings and landscape shots. She is also a co-worker of my wife and I sure don't want to upset the apple cart. I guess I did what I had to do when I had to do it! I guess that is a pretty accurate statement and allows plenty of room to read between the lines - Hah! :-)

I agree with whomever said that people should allow the photographer to pose the subject because they know what to do based on lighting, shadows, and mood. Perhaps there could be a somewhat mutual agreement between the photographer , the subject, and the subject's relatives?

I was pretty serious when I wrote this excerpt prior in this thread:



As we have just barely scratched the surface in this thread about the quest for degrees of skin softening and maintaining skin textures and maintaining reality in facial features during PP'ing, I would still like to know how we decide the degree of skin and facial changes particularly applied to age groups of people as well as gender specific changes.

If we get philosophical, what right do we have to make those changes and how are we affecting girls at different age levels, making them think that being skinny and blemish free is the correct way to look. As we all know, there have been many theories and discussions about such by psychologists, psychiatrists, talk shows on TV, etc., etc., etc.. Wow, I never intended to get off on that tangent - sorry!

I believe most people's images need to be post processed some to make their photo a little more acceptable. I have no problem with that at all and would actually promote doing it.

I, honestly, just merely would like to know if there is a written set of criteria for PP'ing images based on age and gender so I know what is acceptable, what is good, don't overstep my bounds, and what is going too far? :-) Perhaps that is merely a rhetorical question, and one which each individual must answer themselves . . . Hmmmmm?

Tom

P.S. - Perhaps I might post another image, tomorrow, of this gal that her Mom requested I shoot. It is a pose with her bow. I'm not sure I will, or, if I should. It would be interesting to see what people have to say about it.

rlaugh Loc: Michigan & Florida

Hope I can say this in a way that's not a knock on the photographer,because that's not my intention,but why would you want critique on a shot that was so totally controlled by the mother..clothes,pose,PP,etc! It actually is a reflection of what you say the mother wanted,and not your photography skills! Wouldn't you be better to post a portrait where you had complete control over everything,and have that critiqued,rather then have the mothers ideas critiqued? I'm sure your skill would produce a better outcome then this! I would rather see your product then what someone else wanted you to do! Hope I worded this right!

trc Loc: Logan, OH

rlaugh,

Excellent point! It was quite late last night (going on Midnight, I believe) and I wanted to post a portrait image on UHH for some reasons to try something out and verify something. You are absolutely correct as I slowly depart with my tail between my legs! :-)

I did post another image last night as well, but it was a landscape/waterfall shot. If you're interested, it can be found at http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-208167-1.html#3511950 I'll see about posting another portrait shot sometime soon, maybe a High Key shot and/or Low Key or 1940's style Glamour Shot. Thanks for your input.

By the way, you don't have to worry about being too harsh, I have acquired a pretty hard shell over my many years!!! However, I certainly do appreciate your tactfulness! :thumbup:

Tom :-)

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

When I first saw the image, it was all that bare arm - then I see Russ KNEW what I would say!!

Then read and ring out most of the image was not at your direction but the moms - and that was addressed.

So I guess I am done!. :-)

trc Loc: Logan, OH

Cliff,

I knew you for sure would address the bare arm attocity, but someone beat you to it! I felt like I had to please the mother based on the circumstances previously mentioned. All in all, I guess this image post was a good learning experience for those not aware of bare arms in portraiture. Also, it certainly addressed the fact that the photographer is and should be in control - not the Mother or another relative. 😩

Tom

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

I just revisited your waterfall photograph and then came back to this portrait. I mostly wanted to comment that under no circumstances should you feel you have your tail between your legs. You are being too hard on yourself.

You had asked for critique and so the various posters (me included) gave you their best answers to your question. Believe me that picture is far better than I or many other people on the UHH would have done. Also after reading that the mother directed you to do a certain style the critique isn't as much toward your style but hers. Just because the posters found fault with some technical issues that does not mean the entire picture is a waste of time. You have learned about too much bare skin, posing the model and above all how to deal with a client.

All of the above will make you a much better photographer for your next picture.

Dennis