Female Portrait: What could be improved?

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

09/10/2011 03:38:00 PM · #1

I know my recent Female Portrait image did pretty well, but I figure there is always room for improvement.

I'd love some feedback on the image about what you think could have been done better or different or anything that could have been done to increase the image's (mass?) appeal. Thanks!

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

09/10/2011 03:56:16 PM · #2

When I voted, it seemed to me the image was lacking detail in the shawl and was blocked up in the shadow under the nose. I just played with it a little and got this:

Nik HDR Efex to get the detail back and control the shadow and add a little vignette, set it to luminosity mode so as not to shift the color.

R.

Message edited by author 2011-09-10 16:17:49.

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

09/10/2011 04:33:41 PM · #3

Thanks for the response Bear. One of the other comments on the image said that the shawl was blown, but when I check it on my computer, less than 10 pixels are at 255. Most are under 245, which makes it high key (and I guess, low detail). I thought that made her look more heavenly because, you know, it's my gram and I didn't want her to look like she's going to hell instead of heaven. That's why I kept her skin tones on the high end too. Do you think that the brightness significantly detracts from the rest of the image? I know I'm close to the image because of the subject, but death is also a universal topic, so I thought it would be ok for me to keep death lighter than so dark, like it's usually portrayed because surely everyone has known someone for whom death was more dignified than life? Dunno. Yikes, I'm getting a bit more personal than I had intended. Sorry.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

09/10/2011 04:41:46 PM · #4

Probably somewhere between the two images, actually. It's lace, you need some detail, it looks a little too gray on mine. It's blown out enough to be distracting in yours, I think.

R.

09/10/2011 04:43:22 PM · #5

Thanks Bear! I appreciate your help, as always : )

09/10/2011 07:51:20 PM · #6

Here's my take on it:

I was playing around with techniques I learned in a tutorial -- bringing down the highlights, bringing up the shadows and using a high pass filter to sharpen. Then topazed the shawl to try to get more detail (but not the face)

I don't know if it's any better or worse -- but it's different. :)

Message edited by author 2011-09-10 19:58:03.

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

09/10/2011 08:40:51 PM · #7

Interesting that you also chose the shawl as the main element you wanted to change. Photo school kinda beat into me that colors should be true in the image, so blacks should be 0-30 and whites should be 240-255. I guess that's not always the way to go, at least at DPC : )

Thanks Wendy!

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

09/10/2011 08:43:21 PM · #8

Originally posted by geinafets:

Photo school apparently neglected to teach you Zone System, then :-)

R.

Strikeslip

Canon EOS-5D

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

09/10/2011 08:59:40 PM · #9

09/10/2011 09:28:04 PM · #10

Originally posted by geinafets:

nope -- it's not that it's too light, it's just that there should be texture there. It's obviously lace, but the texture is missing. That's all I was trying to get.

09/10/2011 10:05:32 PM · #11

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by geinafets:
Interesting that you also chose the shawl as the main element you wanted to change. Photo school kinda beat into me that colors should be true in the image, so blacks should be 0-30 and whites should be 240-255. I guess that's not always the way to go, at least at DPC : )

Thanks Wendy!

Photo school apparently neglected to teach you Zone System, then :-)

R.

They taught the Zone System in BnW class and 35mm film class, and I didn't get the chance to take either : /

09/10/2011 10:14:56 PM · #12

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by geinafets:
Interesting that you also chose the shawl as the main element you wanted to change. Photo school kinda beat into me that colors should be true in the image, so blacks should be 0-30 and whites should be 240-255. I guess that's not always the way to go, at least at DPC : )

Thanks Wendy!

nope -- it's not that it's too light, it's just that there should be texture there. It's obviously lace, but the texture is missing. That's all I was trying to get.

ooops -- I might have mistyped. Most of the work I did was on the face (the lightening the shadows, bringing down the highlights, high pass sharpening, etc.)

The lace was just an afterthought -- topaz thrown in.

09/10/2011 10:19:21 PM · #13

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by geinafets:
Interesting that you also chose the shawl as the main element you wanted to change. Photo school kinda beat into me that colors should be true in the image, so blacks should be 0-30 and whites should be 240-255. I guess that's not always the way to go, at least at DPC : )

Thanks Wendy!

nope -- it's not that it's too light, it's just that there should be texture there. It's obviously lace, but the texture is missing. That's all I was trying to get.

ooops -- I might have mistyped. Most of the work I did was on the face (the lightening the shadows, bringing down the highlights, high pass sharpening, etc.)

The lace was just an afterthought -- topaz thrown in.

I've been resisting buying HDR/tone-mapping software because I'm too stubborn to admit that I can't get the same effect on my own. I get a little bit closer to caving after each challenge though! Thanks for nudging me a bit more.