Rachel Foster
New member
I'm examining photos on an external monitor now, shooting with remote switch, but still don't have my fast lens. Anything better? Or pretty much the same?
-
Please use real names.
Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed
Firstname Lastname
Register
We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know! -
Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!
Am I getting this a little better?
- Thread starter Rachel Foster
- Start date
Bart_van_der_Wolf
pro member
Rachel,
The low main light is not very flattering to the subject. A classic position (as a starting point for experimentation) is to have the shadow from the tip of the nose to fall in the corner of the mouth. That will in most cases result in both eyes getting lit, and light from above looks natural. It is also more common to put the main light at the 'short' side of the face, to avoid over-emphasizing the cheek that's turned to the camera.
Personally I'd like more detail in the shadows, e.g. with a reflection screen, but I know you like contrast.
Bart
Rachel Foster
New member
That may be it. I used the low position to get the shadowing I wanted, but it does draw the eye to her chest and lower part of her face. That may be just what's wrong here.
David A. Goldfarb
New member
The footlight can be an interesting effect as a fill, about two stops below the main light. You see it in some classic Hollywood photography to add a bit of mysterious glow. Too much though, or using it as the main light, and it can look more like a horror movie.
Greg Rogers
New member
To me the point here is that overall, the shot is brighter than what we've previously been seeing (a bit harsh on the highlights, but that may well be beside the point ATM), and there is definitely more shadow detail than we usually see from you, Rachel.
This suggests that what I've been quietly suspecting is perhaps correct. Uncalibrated laptop monitors are typically way too cold (blue), and way, way, way too bright. This would, in theory lead you to over-darkening during manipulation to make it look right to you, and to those of us with calibrated monitors too dark. You'd never have seen the difference even when viewing your own posts here because again, your laptop monitor was likely way too bright.
I don't mean to undermine any of the lighting comments above, but on the subject of monitor calibration and wysiwyg (and more correctly are we wysiwyg-ing what you are wysiwyg-ing
), I would say yes, your external monitor is quite likely closer to where it should be than your laptop screen, and we are probably likely seeing an image much closer to what you are. So I'd have to say yes, you are getting closer.
edit: Don't know if you're doing any post-shot editing or not, but it's almost irrelevant for now. The closer you get to a calibrated monitor, the closer you come to c & c from this forum being useful to you.They are not if the commenter is not seeing what you are seeing, and if you've changed absolutely nothing except adding the external monitor, then my entire post is pointless (sort of).
Just my .02, regards,
Greg
This suggests that what I've been quietly suspecting is perhaps correct. Uncalibrated laptop monitors are typically way too cold (blue), and way, way, way too bright. This would, in theory lead you to over-darkening during manipulation to make it look right to you, and to those of us with calibrated monitors too dark. You'd never have seen the difference even when viewing your own posts here because again, your laptop monitor was likely way too bright.
I don't mean to undermine any of the lighting comments above, but on the subject of monitor calibration and wysiwyg (and more correctly are we wysiwyg-ing what you are wysiwyg-ing
), I would say yes, your external monitor is quite likely closer to where it should be than your laptop screen, and we are probably likely seeing an image much closer to what you are. So I'd have to say yes, you are getting closer.edit: Don't know if you're doing any post-shot editing or not, but it's almost irrelevant for now. The closer you get to a calibrated monitor, the closer you come to c & c from this forum being useful to you.They are not if the commenter is not seeing what you are seeing, and if you've changed absolutely nothing except adding the external monitor, then my entire post is pointless (sort of).
Just my .02, regards,
Greg
Last edited:
Rachel Foster
New member
Oh, monitor calibration is definitely a must and definitely another challenge (I'm going to call it Photoshop II). I have a meeting with a local pro photographer (re: a proposed joint project) on Tuesday and I'm going to see if I can get some advice from him.'
He's agreed to let me shoot his portrait so maybe he'll be motivated to help me out a little! Ha!
He's agreed to let me shoot his portrait so maybe he'll be motivated to help me out a little! Ha!
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Rachel,
The picture is a good idea however, the light is not painting, it is just blasting the left side of the face. The neck is superbright white and the left cheek is yellow. What light is this?
I would not worry about the flower. The rierst thing is the light. It's good to buy a mannequin head (see the links I posted in the Mannequin thread). Use a light meter to check readings on different parts of the head and neck or pay or imprison a child. Adjust the light so it is not so extreme! That is not complicated but has to be done. Once you have a base setting write it down and that will be a time saver. Maybr bounce the light off a huge white card.
I suggest a shutter speed of at least 1/60. A 1/8 is rather slow.
Asher
I've been following your blog, so I know you are making gret strides! Keep up with it!
The picture is a good idea however, the light is not painting, it is just blasting the left side of the face. The neck is superbright white and the left cheek is yellow. What light is this?
I would not worry about the flower. The rierst thing is the light. It's good to buy a mannequin head (see the links I posted in the Mannequin thread). Use a light meter to check readings on different parts of the head and neck or pay or imprison a child. Adjust the light so it is not so extreme! That is not complicated but has to be done. Once you have a base setting write it down and that will be a time saver. Maybr bounce the light off a huge white card.
I suggest a shutter speed of at least 1/60. A 1/8 is rather slow.
Asher
I've been following your blog, so I know you are making gret strides! Keep up with it!
Rachel Foster
New member
You have that right! The light is an assault on her face! I've since been using a monitor that's lcd rather than my laptop and I'm appalled at what I'm seeing.
Lighting is far too harsh and focus is not there on most things I've done. I simply could not see that on the laptop, nor could my husband.
Changes will be made now that I know what I'm producing!
Lighting is far too harsh and focus is not there on most things I've done. I simply could not see that on the laptop, nor could my husband.
Changes will be made now that I know what I'm producing!
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Rachel,
I don't see this as a monitor issue rather a lighting problem. The face on her left is yellow and over bright! So what light were you using?
If it's going to be yellow, then all the light has to be the same!!!!!
One then uses a grey card (Kodak) or ExpoDisk or else Michael Tapes' plastic grey card, the WhiBal™ which is superb!
In Adobe RAW, just click on the grey card and get the correction, save it and then use it for all the other images from that shoot and position. If using the expo disk, go the the subject position and point the vamera back towards the dominet light source and take a picture. With all these methods, that one test shot is then selected for the camera Custom WB Menu to custom WB all your shots taken under those conditions. After that, switch back to AUTO WB!
Let us know what you are using.
If you are using jpg the reading from the gray card or other standard neutral surface can be stored in the camera and then the jpg would be corrected on the fly!
Don't make the monitor the very first step. Lighting is the number one step!
If you just had control of the light and don’t alter the color controls in PS, your color will never look like this image! I appreciate your generosity in sharing your image because without it, we couldn't cover this topic so well.
BTW, selecting the abnormal yellow area and then adding a feathered & blurred layer (blended with a copy of the original color layer0, (picking up the hue from elsewhere on the face), can repair this image of the dancer very well.
Asher
I don't see this as a monitor issue rather a lighting problem. The face on her left is yellow and over bright! So what light were you using?
If it's going to be yellow, then all the light has to be the same!!!!!
One then uses a grey card (Kodak) or ExpoDisk or else Michael Tapes' plastic grey card, the WhiBal™ which is superb!
In Adobe RAW, just click on the grey card and get the correction, save it and then use it for all the other images from that shoot and position. If using the expo disk, go the the subject position and point the vamera back towards the dominet light source and take a picture. With all these methods, that one test shot is then selected for the camera Custom WB Menu to custom WB all your shots taken under those conditions. After that, switch back to AUTO WB!
Let us know what you are using.
If you are using jpg the reading from the gray card or other standard neutral surface can be stored in the camera and then the jpg would be corrected on the fly!
Don't make the monitor the very first step. Lighting is the number one step!
If you just had control of the light and don’t alter the color controls in PS, your color will never look like this image! I appreciate your generosity in sharing your image because without it, we couldn't cover this topic so well.
BTW, selecting the abnormal yellow area and then adding a feathered & blurred layer (blended with a copy of the original color layer0, (picking up the hue from elsewhere on the face), can repair this image of the dancer very well.
Asher
Last edited:
In my opinion, FWIW, getting the WB right (closely followed by exposure) is the most important thing you can do. Even if you don't like the results, it provides an accurate basis for adjustment rather than blindly waving the colour temp. slider to and fro.
MT has produced. along with Power Retouche, a PS plugin aimed at getting the correct WB with JPEGs. Although designed specifically for the Whibal card, it should work with any neutral grey reference. Have a look at this link It's a free download.
Regards,
Stuart
MT has produced. along with Power Retouche, a PS plugin aimed at getting the correct WB with JPEGs. Although designed specifically for the Whibal card, it should work with any neutral grey reference. Have a look at this link It's a free download.
Regards,
Stuart
Last edited:
Rachel Foster
New member
Oh, I plan to do that, all of that.
My point is that I wasn't seeing what I was producing! I didn't know what everyone else saw because it didn't look the same for me. So, I was setting up lighting based on what I've been seeing show up the past few months on my screen.
I was using a cheap studio light with I think a 60 watt soft-light bulb. Now that I'm getting a truer representation, I'll know how I need to alter. Thanks for your advice, everyone.
Doggonit it's frustrating to realize how much time and effort went to waste because I didn't see the results! It's like trying to edit with severe myopia!
My point is that I wasn't seeing what I was producing! I didn't know what everyone else saw because it didn't look the same for me. So, I was setting up lighting based on what I've been seeing show up the past few months on my screen.
I was using a cheap studio light with I think a 60 watt soft-light bulb. Now that I'm getting a truer representation, I'll know how I need to alter. Thanks for your advice, everyone.
Doggonit it's frustrating to realize how much time and effort went to waste because I didn't see the results! It's like trying to edit with severe myopia!
Hi Rachel,
Just my opinion - it doesn't matter too much of what you see, much of it's still there. Just a few seconds work (a bit more time, and working on the original would nail it better) Need to blur the flower, maybe - play with levels to bring something more into girl's right eye, obviously get rid of the 8 bit shading artefacts on the neck.
The problem is, .... well you know what the problem is
Best wishes,
Ray
Just my opinion - it doesn't matter too much of what you see, much of it's still there. Just a few seconds work (a bit more time, and working on the original would nail it better) Need to blur the flower, maybe - play with levels to bring something more into girl's right eye, obviously get rid of the 8 bit shading artefacts on the neck.
The problem is, .... well you know what the problem is
Best wishes,
Ray
Rachel Foster
New member
LOL Ray! The problem is me and my determination to see "my vision!"
The B&W is better, I agree, and more "Rachel Foster." But I would do it less dark I think. You definitely have my "style" nailed, though.
In fact, the more I look at it, the more I think I'll reproduce it as best I can and give her a copy. That really is quite nice!
The B&W is better, I agree, and more "Rachel Foster." But I would do it less dark I think. You definitely have my "style" nailed, though.
In fact, the more I look at it, the more I think I'll reproduce it as best I can and give her a copy. That really is quite nice!
Rachel Foster
New member
Oh, one note: Tonight's rose shoot...I've gone RAW!
Rachel Foster
New member
RAW files.....ROCK!
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Rachel,
Just my opinion - it doesn't matter too much of what you see, much of it's still there. Just a few seconds work (a bit more time, and working on the original would nail it better) Need to blur the flower, maybe - play with levels to bring something more into girl's right eye, obviously get rid of the 8 bit shading artefacts on the neck.
The problem is, .... well you know what the problem is
Ray,
You got rid of the yellow. One important thing you did was hide the right eye and now the face is at ease. She has a lazy eye and before it caught my attention. Now it's not a distraction.
The challenge is to correct the color and make the flower part of a composition. Who watns to take this on! Come champions of color. Mend this image! Strut you stiff!
Asher
Bev Sampson
New member
Here's my attempt. If this had been shot RAW, a much better PS ACR 4.2 correction could have been made. Is it worth it to correct an image with this great a DR?
Also, the edges on the over exposed side of the face could have been blended better.
Bev
Also, the edges on the over exposed side of the face could have been blended better.
Bev
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Bev, you have done a splendid job. I like the color now. The edges dont show up easily.
You protected the lips nicely.
Further ideas to consider:
1. Her Left Eye: The opening of light to the right eye means that the "lazy eye" (lack of coinicidence of left and right eye positions, is now obvious. So perhaps we might consider movong down the left iris and pupil to normalize this. However, there would be a tiny rim of iris we'd have to repair this too.
I'd look at the right cheek and smooth the 3D texture somewhat as this is caused by the extreme shadowing and is not too flattering.
3. Detail in left cheeek: can more fine detail be returned?
In any case, Bev, you have demonstated how, in a pinch an important image might be rescued. This is valuable. Could you outline the steps to do this?
Thanks for your effort?
Asher
You protected the lips nicely.
Further ideas to consider:
1. Her Left Eye: The opening of light to the right eye means that the "lazy eye" (lack of coinicidence of left and right eye positions, is now obvious. So perhaps we might consider movong down the left iris and pupil to normalize this. However, there would be a tiny rim of iris we'd have to repair this too.
I'd look at the right cheek and smooth the 3D texture somewhat as this is caused by the extreme shadowing and is not too flattering.
3. Detail in left cheeek: can more fine detail be returned?
In any case, Bev, you have demonstated how, in a pinch an important image might be rescued. This is valuable. Could you outline the steps to do this?
Thanks for your effort?
Asher
Rachel Foster
New member
I attempted to imitate Ray's edit (and fell short, of course, but that's beside the point). This young woman owns a dance studio and is having a small reception and showing of the work of "emerging artists." I wanted her to have a portrait to display, so I had my attempt printed and framed it for her. Here it is.
This isn't awful, but I'm looking forward to a reshoot. I've asked to reshoot this model as well. Imagine if I get this one right!
This isn't awful, but I'm looking forward to a reshoot. I've asked to reshoot this model as well. Imagine if I get this one right!
Last edited:
Bev Sampson
New member
Thank you Asher. I was not at all happy with the shadow created by the nose on the right side. I tried to shadow everything evenly but failed. I will post the history or a composite of that history tomorrow. Most of the overesposure on the left was conpensated by selecting the area, and then using photo filters in PS CS3
I am drinking a little wine right now and taking a evening break.
Also, the lazy eye, I have the same condition that has been surgery corrected to an extent. I, or someone else could give cut and paste a try. I would like to see what someone else could achieve Actually, I think that if the entire right side of the face was shadowed evenly, there would be no need to work further on the eye itself.
Actually, I do not like or have the patience to do this much editing on an image but try to get the exposure correct initially. However, sometimes it cannot be avoided.
Bev
I am drinking a little wine right now and taking a evening break.
Also, the lazy eye, I have the same condition that has been surgery corrected to an extent. I, or someone else could give cut and paste a try. I would like to see what someone else could achieve Actually, I think that if the entire right side of the face was shadowed evenly, there would be no need to work further on the eye itself.
Actually, I do not like or have the patience to do this much editing on an image but try to get the exposure correct initially. However, sometimes it cannot be avoided.
Bev
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Bev,
You earned your wine and our love and respect! I appreciate that you put yourself out to help solve this not uncommon issue.
Asher
You earned your wine and our love and respect! I appreciate that you put yourself out to help solve this not uncommon issue.
Asher
Rachel Foster
New member
Oh, I agree Bev, and redoing it is the tack I'm taking. Get it right if you can to begin with. I am impressed by what editing can do, though.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Rachel,
One has to do both!
Art is not an act, but a process. It cannot be that our work is likely complete with one simple shutter click!
Asher
One has to do both!
Art is not an act, but a process. It cannot be that our work is likely complete with one simple shutter click!
Asher
Rachel Foster
New member
True, but one can dream: World peace, end to hunger, perfect shots and hot fudge sundaes that cause weight loss.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Stop that immediately!!!
Rachel Foster
New member
OK!
(Have an urge to giggle......)
Seriously, one must know both. But the chicken/egg dilemma surfaces. Perhaps the solution is to toss that way of thinking and go with an ebb and flow model. Right now shooting is taking precedence and editing will become more ascendant; each gaining a bit of ground with each cycle.
(Have an urge to giggle......)
Seriously, one must know both. But the chicken/egg dilemma surfaces. Perhaps the solution is to toss that way of thinking and go with an ebb and flow model. Right now shooting is taking precedence and editing will become more ascendant; each gaining a bit of ground with each cycle.
Will Thompson
Well Known Member
And my favorite The "Crispy Cream Diet"!
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Rachel,
In my mind, there must be no lines drawn between the first germ of an idea to walk over to the person and chat about the portrait and every other part of the picture. This must and can only be a process in which you develop, bargain, exchange, rethink, transform and gradually, each time giving and taking, get work done on the road to your picture which must always remain fluid. The time you spend looking at the image on your screen is still part of the creative process or you have no right to use anything but a Polaroid camera! You must be the controller all the way, wherever there is a choice, best it be yours and that you allow that.
If someone thinks they make a picture by arranging lights and a pose, they may be right. However, when one continues the process all the way through post processing and printing, then one has the richest artistic experience.
I could give a hoot that you blew out half the neck if you end up with a great picture.
Asher
Bev Sampson
New member
Asher, here are the actions in PS CS3 that I used. If the image had been RAW, or course, adjustments would have been more accurate. Also, my monitor is not calibrated (embarassed) and I think is clipping blacks so I do not know what you actually see on a calibrated monitor.
1. duplicate background layer to make all adjustments
2. Auto levels
3. select overexposed area with quick selection tool.
4. adjust exposure on selection -34 gamma 1. This is a new tool in CS3
5. select warm photo filter to adjust quick selection
6. deselect.
7. select shadow/highlight. set shadow parameters to tone width 50%, amount 11%, radius 50
8. select left, highlighter eye, and apply unsharp mask 150%
9. deselect eye.
10. Crop to rectangle.
11. Hue/Saturation on master -7 (to reduce the red skin tone just slightly.)
12. flatten layers
I may have adjusted brightness/contrast a bit at this point with no further sharpening. I think that's all of it.
Hi Rachel.
I very much like the way you setup this photo allowing a black background with no shadows. I always found that difficult to do. I have a suggestion for determining correct exposure for an image like dancer. I would have hand metered from the brightest spot on dancer pointing the meter to the light source. While keeping the camera at the same distance as the light source, I would have manually set F-stop and shutter speed according to the meter readings.
Or, another way is to focus on the brightest spot on the model with a half press of the shutter. Get an exposure reading and then set shutter speed and F-stop manually, refocus and shoot.
I can't say that I am that exacting all the time but when I shoot people I do take more precautions. Natures creatures are easier to correct after the shoot in PS.
Bev
Bev Sampson
New member
whoops, remember to feather or blend all selections.
Bev
Bev