Hi I'm new (for the third time) - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

02/02/2006 01:11:02 PM · #1

Just a random, spur of the moment picture, so disregard the non-professionalism of it; what I'm referring to here is the post processing. Mine consists of adjusting levels. And that's it. This's always how I've done it, and I never really realized how unimpressive it looks.

Basically, I'm asking all you talented people what sort of post processing you use to make your portraits look better/more professional.

(And prettier.)

Edit: I don't know why I keep calling my thread titles "hi I'm new." :(

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 13:18:55.

alexgarcia

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

02/02/2006 01:17:30 PM · #2

This thread was wonderful for me to beguin in PS. Very good the explanations of one of the best in PS here, Bear_Music.

//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=277413

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 13:18:04.

_eug

Nikon D50

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

02/02/2006 01:26:02 PM · #3

Not photoshop related, but notice that the flash you are using has turned your face white vs. a normal pink-tan skin tone and it's casting harsh shadows behind your head. Dial back the Flash level if you can.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

02/02/2006 02:09:12 PM · #4

_eug has hit the nail on the head, so to speak. Lighting is the key to beautiful portraiture. That doesn't mean you necessarily need a lot of expensive lighting equipment. Some of the most striking portraits I've ever seen were shot in existing light. I admit to a strong bias, since I have a great love for existing-light photography.
I'd specifically like to suggest that you experiment with diffused window light. Just pull a sheer curtain (or hang something temporarily) over a window, or just shoot near a window on a cloudy day. Experiment with your subject's position, and possibly with a reflector (a white poster board will do) as a reflector to avoid too-deep shadows.
If you're in a situation where you MUST use flash, it's best to bounce it off a ceiling, or otherwise diffuse it. It's impossible to do that with on-camera flash, and that's where additional equipment comes into the picture, so to speak.

02/02/2006 02:52:05 PM · #5

Okay, I suppose I will try a picture with natural light now. But after that, I want photoshop tips!!!

Nelzie

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

02/02/2006 03:00:30 PM · #6

I have a few portraits that aren't to shabby.

This one.

Is the better of the two. What I used was a spot of "NeatImage" some Unsharp Mask (USM) and some tweaking of levels. To shoot it, I had my 50mm prime lense and my Flash unit with a Omni-Bounce plastic attachment, with the flash pointing up towards the ceiling by about 45 degrees. The location was a dark restaurant and I was sitting just far enough away that there was virtually no cropping involved.

This one.

Same basic setup and location as the first one. The only real problem I see is the pose and the background. The picture frame behind my sis kind of breaks up the look of the portrait in a not-so-great way.

EDIT:

Anyway, it's one part lighting, one part equipment and then one part post-processing all mixed up with setting the scene; posing the subject, placing the subject. It took me a while just to figure out enough of those things to get those two portaits off well.

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 15:03:15.

Strikeslip

Canon EOS-5D

02/02/2006 03:05:47 PM · #7

I find that the best portraits happen when you stick your face in a fish tank and spit blue dye.

_eug

Nikon D50

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

02/02/2006 03:08:54 PM · #8

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

I find that the best portraits happen when you stick your face in a fish tank and spit blue dye.

I worry about you man. lol

02/02/2006 03:14:22 PM · #9

Forgive my "model"'s face, she wasn't prepared to take pictures today. I'm mostly concerned with post-processing now. What can I do with photoshop to make it better?

Unsharp mask confuses me, because all I ever hear of people doing with photoshop is smart blur, though I don't know how to work it so I'm staying away from it for now.

Edit: forgot to make it a thumbnail.

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 15:15:30.

Nelzie

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

02/02/2006 03:18:28 PM · #10

Play with USM a bit...

Brother in Law with his baby before USM...

Brother in Law with his baby after USM...

Beyond that, experiment, experiment, experiment. It's all digital, so it's not like you will 'ruin' your image, unless you choose against working with copies...

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

02/02/2006 03:22:27 PM · #11

With USM I start with setting Amount-100 radius-3.0 Threshold-6 and preview. I find for me that 100% is to much so I end up around 75% cuz I let me camera do some sharpining. Fear not. Photoshop is all about experimenting. At least for me it is.

Edit Spelling

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 15:23:58.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

02/02/2006 03:58:59 PM · #12

I can definitely see the difference in that. Is there anything else I can do other than unsharp mask? What is this "neatimage"?

Canon EOS-20D

02/02/2006 04:01:20 PM · #13

This is not necessarily specific to the question, but just in case you weren't aware, there are a number of tutorials posted here which you may find helpful in acquiring photoshop tips.

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

02/02/2006 04:11:51 PM · #14

Noise Reduction

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 16:12:07.

saintaugust

Canon EOS-550D Rebel T2i

02/02/2006 04:31:10 PM · #15

try to avoid too much red in your portraits, like this.

rasdub

Nikon D70

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

02/02/2006 04:45:59 PM · #16

I like to use NeatImage, but am careful not to use it too much b/c of the plastic skin look that it can give the subject. One tip I will suggest if you use noise reduction, like NeatImage, then use Unsharp Mask after applying the noise reduction, not before. Come to think of it, I generally save the USM application for my last step on any pictures that I think need it. Other may disagree.

Nelzie

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

02/02/2006 05:34:19 PM · #17

Originally posted by rasdub:

I agree, USM is typically my final step, before saving and then saving again, for web.

front_element

Nikon D700

02/02/2006 05:36:23 PM · #18

Have a look at the articles on this website:

//www.northlight-images.co.uk/tutorial_pages/elements_basic/elements_tutorial.html

They give a good summary of the 'workflow' associated with producing good images from digital sources.

Things need to be done in the 'correct' order, with sharpening (USM, Neat Image or whatever) done at the end of all other processes.

fotomann_forever

02/02/2006 05:56:08 PM · #19

Hey, Hail, whatever you do, keep your pants pulled up, or these folks will pick on you, like they do me and pa_culbert. :-P

Marjo

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

02/02/2006 06:42:39 PM · #20

.

Message edited by author 2006-02-04 22:39:28.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

02/02/2006 07:27:54 PM · #21

Keep my pants pulled up? Is this an expression? Or can you really see my pants? :(

I played around with a few more images and at last edited one to a point where it gave me joy. It wasn't a well-taken picture though, so I think I'll keep it to myself. :)

fotomann_forever

02/02/2006 07:38:22 PM · #22

Originally posted by Hail the Heartbreaker:

Keep my pants pulled up? Is this an expression? Or can you really see my pants? :(

I was just messing around and referring to images like my profile pic and this one on pa_cuthbert's profile.

jpochard

Canon EOS-40D

02/02/2006 07:50:41 PM · #23

I think that, for the most part, the key to a really nice portrait is to emphasize the eyes. People are my favorite subjects for photography, even though I'm not a pro.

In photoshop, I will generally work with the eyes by increasing the white level, selecting and applying USM perhaps a bit more to the eyes than to the overall photo, and I will also work a bit with the color to try and make it more evident, however natural.

My "best of 2005" didn't do so well in the scoring, but I like it. It's a portrait that had a lot of photoshop done to it (maybe too much?) Some of it was working with the cloning tool to even out skin tone and reduce skin blemishes, some was working lightly with the lightening tool (burn? dodge? I can never keep them straight) to highlight the hair a bit and lessen some shadows. I also generally work some with the background, perhaps blurring it a bit or darkening some around the edges.

Just some ideas for you that I hope are helpful.

downtherabbithole

02/02/2006 08:56:29 PM · #24

Originally posted by Hail the Heartbreaker:

I suppose I mostly consider myself a portrait photographer, because that's what I like taking pictures of best, even if I'm not the very best at it. But looking through dpc and all the lovely portraits people take, I became saddened. Let me demonstrate:

Just a random, spur of the moment picture, so disregard the non-professionalism of it; what I'm referring to here is the post processing. Mine consists of adjusting levels. And that's it. This's always how I've done it, and I never really realized how unimpressive it looks.

Basically, I'm asking all you talented people what sort of post processing you use to make your portraits look better/more professional.

(And prettier.)

Edit: I don't know why I keep calling my thread titles "hi I'm new." :(