Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Professional and Advanced Portraiture
Indoor portrait
Sep 27, 2018 18:42:59   #
wayne-03 Loc: Minnesota
 
Indoor portrait


(Download)

Reply
Sep 27, 2018 19:45:57   #
Photog8 Loc: Morriston, FL
 
Lovely...well lighted.

Reply
Sep 27, 2018 20:27:06   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
Critique:

Nice image- pretty model and great expression!

Skin texture- There is kind of a mottled texture- I don't know if it's her makeup or something that happened in editing or retouching- bit of softening can correct that.

Lighting: The main light may be slightly high as it is not sufficiently illuminating the eyes- the catch-lights are a bit weak and are concealed under the lids. A bit of eye brightening and widening plus emphasizing the remaining catch-lights will help. To avoid this, observe the eyes carefully as you a are adjusting the main light and try to get the catch-lights in the 11 or 1 o'clock position and showing well. Make certain that there is ample shadow detail in the eyes.

Feathering the man light will provide good specular highlights and somewhat reduce the hotspot on the forehead.

It is important to direct the eyes, while shooting, to avoid shifted eye positions, lazy lids and ensure alignment with the direction of the face. If the subject is gazing off camera, it's effective to provide a target for her to focus on.

You have good shading but the lighting look slightly flat- an increase in contrast bring up the apparent ratio.

Composition: A slightly tighter crop and allowing more space in front of the subject in the direction she is facing makes for better composition.

With low a cut dcolletage and bright colors a bit of burning in and vignetting will bring more attention to the face.

Attached is a quick edit to illustrate some of theses corrections.


(Download)

Reply
 
 
Sep 28, 2018 08:41:04   #
sb Loc: Florida's East Coast
 
VERY nicely done!

Reply
Sep 28, 2018 09:24:06   #
wayne-03 Loc: Minnesota
 
sb wrote:
VERY nicely done!


Are you talking about my picture or the reddit?

Reply
Sep 28, 2018 13:33:10   #
Cheapshot Loc: California.
 
Nice shot...pretty lady.

Reply
Sep 28, 2018 14:52:18   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
I may be violating the forum rule about unauthorized editing of submitted images. There is, however, a method and reason for my madness. My reason for asking the admin to establish this section and co-managing it was to promote, teach, and exchange ideas about portraiture on an advanced and professional level. The section is open to all photographers of every ilk and at all skill and knowledge levels- you don't need to be a pro to participate. I am assuming that the folks who take the time to post here are seeking improvement in their work as well as othere suggestion and ideas. If the just want to post their work with no constructive criticism or suggestions, they coud do that on the main section or many others- there is absolutely nothing wrong with that!

So...I can talk or write my head off, but it is more effective for me and more beneficial to the OP or those reading on, to illustrate my critiques or suggestions by doing a quick and dirty edit to explain my points. The edits are not an attempt to hijack any images or made to represent perfectly finished work- just a kind of mock-up to give the OPs an idea of how they could improve their technique for the next portraits the are going to produce and how the may want to further enhance and remedy any issues the originally posted image.

I also understand that retouching, softening and post processing are sometimes a very controversial subjects here on the forum. My opinion is, however, that retouching, post processing and what we used to call CUSTOM PRINTING is part and parcel of professional portrait photography. Not every client or subject will be satisfied with a straight out of the camera image, especially if it accentuates certain blemishes or features that are considered aesthetically displeasing. Besides the aesthetics, there are many technical issues that should be addressed in post processing as to density, contrast and color saturation as well as composition.

For many years in my own studio business, I maintained in-house darkrooms for custom black and white and color printing in order to maxamize the quality of all finished work. In addition I employed two full time retouchers. Oftentimes all the "information" to create masterful salon quality prints is already on the negative but the potential can only be maximized through expert printing techniques. Nowadays, with digital imaging, all of those controls can be translated into current post processing methodologies.

Of course, it is best to address as may aesthetic and technical issues while shooting- right at the camera. The production adn results will usually be more authentic and natural as well as time intensive and economical. If most of the work is done in camera, all that needs to be done in post processing workflow is minor tweaking. The extent of softentening and retouching is a matter of client requirements demands as well as the photographer's discretion and quality control.

So here's my "lesson" on this image.

I softened the image a bit to subdue a mottled texture in the skin. I highlighted and accentuated the eyes. In my othere post I covered what the photographer should do to direct the eyes and make certain the the are not downcast or drooping. I also mentioned methods of lighting for the eyes. In a portrait, the emphasis shoud be on the face so I darkened and desaturated the colorful clothing slightly- they are still bright and cheery but less distracting. In the background, the lighting should be arranged so the background is slightly lighter on the side where the subject is facing. This helps direct the viewer's eyes to the mask of the face rather than the back of the head.

For many years I sat on judging panels for professional print competitions. One of the biggest and frequent reasons for losing points was what we called "minus density" prints. All the information seemed to be there (on the original negative of digital file_ but there was no "printing down" to maxamize highlight detail. Oftentimes the shadows were vaccant due to undeerexposure or poor printing techniques. Much of theses issues could have been easily remedied by custom printing- likewise for compositional issues.

Having written all of this- I don't consider my opinions as "carved in stone"! I am always open to comment, debate and questions as well as other points of view and suggestions.

Thanks to the eOP for taking the time to post here!

Reply
 
 
Oct 2, 2018 09:17:57   #
bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana
 
I didn't see the "mottled" skin texture at all until I downloaded the original. I don't know what was happening with that, I wonder if it wasn't more a JPEG compression issue on upload. The thumbnail is outstanding. Once downloaded, though, as Ed said, her arm and some places on her face are really "crispy", I don't even know a good term for how the download looked.

Again, I've had some of my uploads go completely wonky based on the compression. My question to the OP is, does the download, or the thumbnail most resemble the final product?

Reply
Oct 2, 2018 10:10:14   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
Yeah- for sure- God only know what happens to an image in transmission and add to that conflicting screen calibrations etc. I really don't expect perfect images on any downloaded material. At The studio, I have a Mac set up for transmitting commercial shots to art directors and printers- that one is calibrated perfectly so what I see, hopefully, is what they get at the other end.

As for the "mottling" on the original post- I have not seen that, as yet, as a result of Jpeg compression but anythg is possible.

In this image, I was more concerned with the lighting and facial aesthetics (the eyes) as I noted. The corrections I made are what I would do in custom printing of a display portrait or a print in a wedding album.

My point was that oftentimes all the necessary information in the original file- color, density, contrast, lighing ratio and composition are all potentially there but needs to be tweaked or maximized in the final editing.

The OP, never came back to ask about my comments so I don't know what was on his original image.

Reply
Oct 3, 2018 13:05:15   #
bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
Yeah- for sure- God only know what happens to an image in transmission and add to that conflicting screen calibrations etc. I really don't expect perfect images on any downloaded material. At The studio, I have a Mac set up for transmitting commercial shots to art directors and printers- that one is calibrated perfectly so what I see, hopefully, is what they get at the other end.

As for the "mottling" on the original post- I have not seen that, as yet, as a result of Jpeg compression but anythg is possible.

In this image, I was more concerned with the lighting and facial aesthetics (the eyes) as I noted. The corrections I made are what I would do in custom printing of a display portrait or a print in a wedding album.

My point was that oftentimes all the necessary information in the original file- color, density, contrast, lighing ratio and composition are all potentially there but needs to be tweaked or maximized in the final editing.

The OP, never came back to ask about my comments so I don't know what was on his original image.
Yeah- for sure- God only know what happens to an i... (show quote)


I could be wrong. I noticed his posts on the people photography section as well, that look really smooth in the thumbnail, but upon download have that same strange effect.

Not sure what point in the process things fell apart, or why.

I wasn't disagreeing with your comments at all, just thought it was interesting to see that huge difference between the thumbnail and the original. What I saw on her arm in the download looked like very overdone sharpening or something, that's why I said it looked "crunchy"
Not sure of the correct digital term.

Reply
Oct 3, 2018 14:18:43   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
bkyser wrote:
I could be wrong. I noticed his posts on the people photography section as well, that look really smooth in the thumbnail, but upon download have that same strange effect.

Not sure what point in the process things fell apart, or why.

I wasn't disagreeing with your comments at all, just thought it was interesting to see that huge difference between the thumbnail and the original. What I saw on her arm in the download looked like very overdone sharpening or something, that's why I said it looked "crunchy"
Not sure of the correct digital term.
I could be wrong. I noticed his posts on the peop... (show quote)



True enough- many problematic issues that are not apparent in a thumbnail version of an image will show up in a properly downloaded image and of course in a more enlarged state. Things like glitches in retouching or editing, overly sharpening and othere faults will come back to bite us in a larger or more acute view. When I am "retouching" blemishes and unwanted lines or wrinkles, I zoom in on the arie, on the screen, to make certain that the work will remain invisible in the finished print or on a larger screen.

The OP, never came back to discuss this issue or the correction I made. I don't know if the "mottling" we observed was in the original file, if it occurred in processing or it is an artifact in the transmission of the image along the way.

I always approach theses things from the "client's" point of view, so whatever the cause of a aesthetically displeasing effect , it shoud be somehow remedied before the final work goes to the customer. I am sure that this the professional approach you or I would take.

"Crunchy" ain't a bad term or description. I wrote "mottled" because it reminded me of what happened, back in the day, if a negative was badly processed and showed excessive grain or mottling due to reticulation caused by extreme differentials in temperature from one chemical to another or in the wash water. Sometimes over-sharpening shows as an artificial "line" or highlight around the subject and detail in an image. Over sharpening can also exaggerate noise or the image structure. When I closed down my darkrooms, I though I left all theses gremlins behind, but alas, nowadays we have digital versions of all the old darkroom disasters.

Reply
 
 
Oct 15, 2018 21:25:12   #
10MPlayer Loc: California
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
Critique:

Nice image- pretty model and great expression!

Skin texture- There is kind of a mottled texture- I don't know if it's her makeup or something that happened in editing or retouching- bit of softening can correct that.

Lighting: The main light may be slightly high as it is not sufficiently illuminating the eyes- the catch-lights are a bit weak and are concealed under the lids. A bit of eye brightening and widening plus emphasizing the remaining catch-lights will help. To avoid this, observe the eyes carefully as you a are adjusting the main light and try to get the catch-lights in the 11 or 1 o'clock position and showing well. Make certain that there is ample shadow detail in the eyes.

Feathering the man light will provide good specular highlights and somewhat reduce the hotspot on the forehead.

It is important to direct the eyes, while shooting, to avoid shifted eye positions, lazy lids and ensure alignment with the direction of the face. If the subject is gazing off camera, it's effective to provide a target for her to focus on.

You have good shading but the lighting look slightly flat- an increase in contrast bring up the apparent ratio.

Composition: A slightly tighter crop and allowing more space in front of the subject in the direction she is facing makes for better composition.

With low a cut dcolletage and bright colors a bit of burning in and vignetting will bring more attention to the face.

Attached is a quick edit to illustrate some of theses corrections.
Critique: br br Nice image- pretty model and grea... (show quote)
Your version looks soft on my computer. I like what you did on the lips, which you didn't mention. The line between the lip coloring and the natural color of the inner lip on the original was distracting. In yours, it's much more appealing.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Professional and Advanced Portraiture
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.