Did I butcher this? pls tell how you would do it?

Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

12/30/2006 10:19:43 AM · #1

Ok...posting original just for comparison....
I am trying to fix this. I cloned the background to fill in, then I made a dup layer and heavily saturated to get a better black. then I applied a mask and brought him back into the darkened background.

Shot in raw, and using Elements 4.0

This is my first attempt at masking, and just starting to use Raw, and still really new at portraits....(as you can tell by my primative backdrop)

Ian is 6'5" and didn't 'fit' in my backdrop and living room.....
So, did I totally botch this attempt at masking?

What processing would you do differently?

I've got strong shoulders so you can be mean!!

Thank You in advance for your time looking!

LN13

Canon EOS-60D

12/30/2006 10:38:51 AM · #2

To me, the background is too dark. It almost looks like you cut and pasted your model onto a black canvas.

Also, why did you cut off his fingers & toes?

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

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

12/30/2006 10:42:03 AM · #3

Hey Melissa. You didn't butcher it, but you cut it pretty badly lol

Here's my go at processing:

Keep in mind, that was pretty fast & furious and working from the web-sized version.

All I did was to adjust levels, add a touch of contrast, sharpen and paint out the spots where the bg was missing with a paintbrush (set to about 10% opacity, using several strokes for a "natural" look).

Your version, I think you pushed contrast too far giving his skin an unnatural white-ness and the bg becoming unnaturally black. Also, and this is minor nit - your model should either wear shoes, or bare feet - socks looks like an oversight or accident.

Azrifel

Fujifilm X100VI

12/30/2006 10:43:43 AM · #4

I think it is a bit overdone, especially the balance between the head and background is bad imo.

I do not know what is available in Photoshop Elements, but here is what I did in PS CS2 to get this (I am not saying mine is a good attempt, but maybe you can use some):

- Selective Color edit (Layer): blacks +23%, neutrals -8%, whites -42%
I often find selective color a more useful way to balance tones than using handselected masks with (de)saturation, curves or whatever. You also get a less hard transition of tones like in your edit. When you work with masks you can avoid that with gaussian blur on the mask itself (not the masked image, the selection itself, bit difficult to explain without showing)
- Cloned the background into the foreground
- USM (in Lab mode on the lightness channel - this is better but not critical) 10% 50px 0 treshold
- worked on the contrast, in my case I prefer the Nik plugin "Pro Contrast", which made a better contrast balance and corrected colors a bit. But you could use the normal contrast tool too. (The Nik plugin will try to avoid to blow your highlights for a longer time)
- If I had a big version I would make a mask selection on the eyes and try to brighten them up slightly (curves or selective color). Here I did a little bit of sloppy dodging
- Added a little bit of extra USM (40% 0.3px 2 treshold)

SteveJ

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

12/30/2006 10:45:32 AM · #5

I can't offer any tech advice, others are more capable. The one thing struck me straight away was his amputated fingers. There is a crease or roll in the cloth he is sitting on and his fingers are hidden behind it. Worth checking out next time you do a sitting, it is only minor but it does jar.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

12/30/2006 11:00:26 AM · #6

I been working on thins as others chimed in, may have overlapped some of what they say. The overall effect is very unnatural. One reason is the BG is so flat and featureless, another is the cutout is too knifelike. I have made a quick stab at both issues by attempting to use gradients to simulate a little light on the BG and to create and actual "floor" for him, and I have blurred the transitions of the cut-n-paste.

Sloppy work on lo-res, but showing a possible direction. You can do this in elements.

12/30/2006 11:08:52 AM · #7

Thank you everyone for your help....I will now go play with all your suggestions..

Mostly you have shown me that it can be salvaged..

Yes, the 'no shoes' was an oversight...he prefered standard head-shots with him sitting on a stool...I asked him to pose on the floor (last shot) and I neglected to look at the sheet covering his fingers and no shoes....

Thank you, I got responses right from the people I wanted them from :-) Thank you...

I really need to learn this post-processing stuff, and your detail will give me good guidance!!!!

Sykes

12/31/2006 09:53:13 AM · #8

Hi Melissa;

I understand that this was a salvage job. Bear Music has got you going in the right direction.

I just want to offer as a side note, that if you can prep a shot as much as possible in front of the camera before you shoot, it will make you a better photographer. By practising and developing your lighting and posing (and backgrounds) you will, in the long run become a much better shooter and much less reliant on things like Photoshop. I find that amateurs and pros have become far too reliant on "fixing it up" in Photoshop after the fact, when many of the problems could be remedied before the camera is fired.

In the end, it does take a lot of practise, mistakes, patience and more practise.

Have a great new year!

Cheers
Don

12/31/2006 12:48:41 PM · #9

Don,
Thanks for the input...I lack experience in both areas (the setup and the photoshop)

What other recommendations would you have for the lighting, etc.

As afore mentioned the sheet was wrinkled around his hand, and missing his shoes. what else should I have done correct??

I only have 2 constant lights and 23" white umbrellas, SB600.
He was sitting about 4-5 feet from the background...lights were at about 10 and 2 o'clock with the sb600 on camera.

Thanks for your help.
I am slowly studying idnic's thread on portraits!

Sykes

12/31/2006 01:19:30 PM · #10

Melissa;

The best advise I could give to you is to take a portrait course. Even a one day workshop would help more than you think. Reading stuff on the web or in books will only get you so far. Having a real model and real teacher with real lights right in front of you just can't be replicated in words or diagrams.
I have taught people before, in studio. It makes all the difference in the world.

Cheers
Don

Olympus 50mm f/1.8 MF Normal Zuiko

12/31/2006 03:15:52 PM · #11

Ok...is this one any better???
Is the black still too black? (I think I may over compensate)
This time I used Levels rather than adjusting the saturation.

Thank you for looking

emorgan49

Olympus E-5

12/31/2006 03:25:08 PM · #12

DO you have room in the photo to straighten him up a bit - He may have been that tipped in real life but might look better.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

12/31/2006 03:28:17 PM · #13

I thought about that....so yes I will straighten him up!
thanks

justamistere

Nikon D3s

12/31/2006 03:48:23 PM · #14

IMHO, some better angles and intensities of lights could make the face more three dimensional. Others, like idnic and her killer bees, can add more detail on this.

digitalknight

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

12/31/2006 03:54:53 PM · #15

here's a couple of ideas from the land of special effects:

1- Zoom way in on any photo straight from your camera, or one that has even been sharpened, and look at a high contrast line. If you get in there really close you'll see that it's not a line at all, but a gradation of different colored pixels. This is called "aliasing" and our eyes are very used to seeing this. So a hard, sharp line outlining anything looks fake to us.

Solution: (for me) I always cut out my elements using masks. Then you can blur, sharpen, and adjust the gamma on your mask to soften the edge and blend your elements together (anything goes editing entrants pay special attention to this).

2- Nature is messy - Our eyes never see void - unless a computer generated it. So even if you did the background in the first photo in grey, and did a gradient to black where the fold was in your backdrop, it would look better. But even gradients can be too clean - study gradients in nature (there's about 25,000 of them on this site) and see what you can do to simulate these in your images.

3- Less is more. The hardest thing for me to learn over the years has been to "back off" the effect. I tend to be so proud of what I've done that I want people to "see" it. When in reality the whole point to an effect is to NOT see it. So make it cool, look at it and admire yourself for what you've done, then back it off by 50% and show the public! :-)

Hope that helps - lots of good advice here - you started a great thread!

Message edited by author 2006-12-31 15:57:48.

Greetmir

Nikon D60

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Nikon

01/02/2007 06:59:41 AM · #16

I would suggest a bit of sharpening on that sitting photo ...

Cheers