Whats the verdict. Please be critical!!
To me the lighting looks odd. The dog is highly illuminated on one side and the models hair is unevenly illuminated on the opposite side. Almost looks like a spotlight on the models hair.
:idea: If you take the Maltese out of the picture and send the pup to me, the picture will be just right! :thumbup:
SonyA580
Loc: FL in the winter & MN in the summer
On my monitor her skin tones look too red. The lighting is a little confusing but I think it could be worked out in post-processing.
I think you over-sharpened the image.
Too much light from the left .
Is this better??? No Hair Light... No side Lights
Gdelvecc wrote:
Is this better??? No Hair Light... No side Lights
Nice!
But I don't have the puppy! :-)
AdamK
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area
Gdelvecc wrote:
Is this better??? No Hair Light... No side Lights
I think #2 is much more pleasing. The lighting looks more normal, the skin tone looks normal, it does not look over-processed. I might remove that catch low in her left eye, or subdue it a little.
The lighting on the first photo is "too much" and from too many different directions. Also, it looks over processed - her skin looks grainy in an unpleasant way.
I'll submit straight away that I'm the world's worst portrait photog, so take my feedback with a grain of salt. #2 would be a portrait that I'd be very proud of had I been the one to take it.
Just beauitiful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:wink:
Topaz Detail would bring out the detail in the dog based on micro/small contrast... then mask out the effect on the woman to allow portrait like smoothness. Best of all worlds as the saying goes.
The picture looks just great the way it is. Nice portrait.
Madman
Loc: Gulf Coast, Florida USA
Just a little, probably fixable. Also, if, possible, I would give her back the top of her head and her elbow. You might also consider removing the brown spots from her wrist.
Nice portrait.
The first one is over sharpened, the second one, get rid of
the white background, otherwise both are good photos.
I like the concept of the first portrait, but would definitely tone down the exposure a few clicks. There are places in the dog's hair that appear to be blown out. I agree with Rook that it looks a bit over sharpened; possibly to compensate for the exposure? I would say the image warrants another try.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.