Portrait of a lady

[Digital]

C&C most welcomed.

[IzzieK]

Bruce -- could do with a little bit of cloning out the freckles... she has a nice set of dimples but I do not know why this shot doesn't really work for me. Maybe Manfred can clarify??? He is good with people shots...

[Digital]

Bruce -- could do with a little bit of cloning out the freckles... she has a nice set of dimples but I do not know why this shot doesn't really work for me. Maybe Manfred can clarify??? He is good with people shots...

Izzie, thank you for your comments.


Bruce

[William W]

Nice connection.

If you're vision for a Front-on Head Shot and Torso 1/4 Profile: then always watch out for the leading Shoulder (Left Shoulder in this shot, shoulder closer to the camera).

As exposed skin it occupies equivalent of about 1/3 ~ 1/2 of the Facial Skin Area - hence it is a big distraction for the Viewer's Eye.

WW

[Digital]

Bill, thanks for the comments. I will take note of this in future photos of this nature.


Bruce

[Shadowman]

Nicely captured, I would reduce the intensity of the flash, to me this is sharply focused which is rare for most portraits I've seen.

[Digital]

Nicely captured, I would reduce the intensity of the flash, to me this is sharply focused which is rare for most portraits I've seen.

Thanks for your comments, John


Bruce

[rpcrowe]

I am just guessing but, I would think that if this were shot with a longer focal length, the general perspective of the portrait, especially of nose and chin, might be changed.

[Digital]

Richard, thanks for your comments. The focal length was 50mm shot on a cropped sensor.



Bruce

[rpcrowe]

I played with this a bit in PP... Here's what I ended up with:

[DougR]

I played with this a bit in PP... Here's what I ended up with:

Although the pp seems subtle, it is a dramatic improvement in my opinion.

[Digital]

Richard, thank you. What exactly did you do in PP?



Bruce

[rpcrowe]

I copied the image and saved it as a JPEG. Then I imported it into Portrait Professional 9 (PP-9 is an older version but it suits me fine). I find that Portrait Professional sometimes overdoes the correction by clearing every blemish, line and wrinkle; making the face look like a wax figure. So, I reduced the value of most of the sliders in PP-9. That still only took me a few minutes. The only sliders that I left in the default setting were to whiten the eyes and sharpen them a bit.

Then I placed a light vignette around the portrait. This reduced the impact of the bright bare shoulder and emphasized her face.

Lots of folks complain about the various versions of Portrait Professional but, I think that results from leaving the corrections at the default level.

Everything that can be done in Portrait Professional, can be done in Photoshop without the PP plug-in. However, much of those corrections are beyond my Photoshop skill levels. Portrait Professional is a good time saver also.

Portrait Professional is not a cure all! One problem with PP-9 is that you cannot use it to correct a face in a profile shot. PP-9 needs to see both eyes in order to work correctly.

[Digital]

I copied the image and saved it as a JPEG. Then I imported it into Portrait Professional 9 (PP-9 is an older version but it suits me fine). I find that Portrait Professional sometimes overdoes the correction by clearing every blemish, line and wrinkle; making the face look like a wax figure. So, I reduced the value of most of the sliders in PP-9. That still only took me a few minutes. The only sliders that I left in the default setting were to whiten the eyes and sharpen them a bit.

Then I placed a light vignette around the portrait. This reduced the impact of the bright bare shoulder and emphasized her face.

Lots of folks complain about the various versions of Portrait Professional but, I think that results from leaving the corrections at the default level.

Everything that can be done in Portrait Professional, can be done in Photoshop without the PP plug-in. However, much of those corrections are beyond my Photoshop skill levels. Portrait Professional is a good time saver also.

Portrait Professional is not a cure all! One problem with PP-9 is that you cannot use it to correct a face in a profile shot. PP-9 needs to see both eyes in order to work correctly.

Richard, thank you very much.


Bruce

[MisterT]

I agree with the comment about the light being a bit too harsh. My only additional comment is that neither eye appears to be in sharp focus and they must be for any portrait shot to be great, but your model certainly justifies more sittings!

[Digital]

I agree with the comment about the light being a bit too harsh. My only additional comment is that neither eye appears to be in sharp focus and they must be for any portrait shot to be great, but your model certainly justifies more sittings!

Andrew, thanks for your comments. I disagree with your opinion on the eyes not being in sharp focus. You can almost count the total number of eyelashes. Also I refer you to post #6.


Bruce

[William W]

I agree with the comment about the light being a bit too harsh. My only additional comment is that neither eye appears to be in sharp focus and [both eyes must be in focus] for any portrait shot to be great, but your model certainly justifies more sittings!

I disagree.

I think it is very foolish to make any definitive rule for Portraiture, or for any art-form, for the purpose of using that rule to define what will, or will not be: 'great'.

WW

[William W]

. . . I disagree with your opinion on the eyes not being in sharp focus. . .

I concur.

The Eyes are in the Plane of Sharp Focus. This can be determined by a comparative forensic analysis of: the eyes; the ear studs and the hairs on the chin.

The Eyes are extracted here:



***

The inline sample image might require some post production sharpening for some to realize that the Eyes are in fact, in the Plane of Sharp Focus.

Here below, the original is on the left, a two stage sharpened redo is on the right. View large to fully appreciate the difference:



WW

[Digital]

Bill, thank you for that analysis. My workflow is such that once I import my pics into Lightroom I exam the eyes on 1:1 magnification. On this particular pic, I found the eyes to be acceptably sharp. I was surprised that Andrew believed the eyes were not in sharp focus.

Bruce