Brown Eyed Blond

[klpurkett]

I was taking candids at a family gathering last weekend, and this was one of my favorites. C&C much appreciated!
Thanks, Kristy

[bnnrcn]

Great shot, a beautiful blond girl

[IzzieK]

She is pretty, Kristy...you have pretty relations..

[Geoff F]

This works fine, although I do wonder about showing the top of her head; even if that meant having a different size ratio?

[D L]

Good shot of a pretty girl.
I think it could do without the green stairs(?) in the background. I see nobody else has commented on that. Maybe it's just me. I don't mind that the top of her head is missing.

[klpurkett]

Great shot, a beautiful blond girl

Thanks Binnur.

[klpurkett]

She is pretty, Kristy...you have pretty relations..

Thank you, Izzie... I do happen to be a bit biased, as this is my three year old Kezia. She has her Daddy's eyes for sure, though neither of us ever had blond hair!

[klpurkett]

This works fine, although I do wonder about showing the top of her head; even if that meant having a different size ratio?

Thanks for the suggestion Geoff. I'll take another look at my crop options. I'm also wondering if it would be better to not cut off the yellow flower on her dress. Maybe a square crop is in order here.

[klpurkett]

Good shot of a pretty girl.
I think it could do without the green stairs(?) in the background. I see nobody else has commented on that. Maybe it's just me. I don't mind that the top of her head is missing.

Thanks David. No, it's not just you... Those steps bother me, too. I'm not sure how to do a good job of getting rid of them entirely... Maybe I should try desaturating them significantly so they aren't such an awful bright green. If I'd had a nice clear background this would be a much better shot. I was shooting candids, so although she's making eye contact, it wasn't posed at all and I didn't have any say in the background... I'm just lucky I didn't have people's legs or feet in the shot! Thanks again for the feedback.

[rpcrowe]

Lovely image of a beautiful young girl.

I cropped it square to eliminate a lot of the background and cropped it just a bit lower on her hair - it seems to me that it looks more "planned" that way than if it were cropped with just a smidgen of her head cropped off.

I decreased the saturation a bit and I brightened and sharpened her eyes just a little.

All in all, not very much change. How do you like this version?

[klpurkett]

Lovely image of a beautiful young girl.

I cropped it square to eliminate a lot of the background and cropped it just a bit lower on her hair - it seems to me that it looks more "planned" that way than if it were cropped with just a smidgen of her head cropped off.

I decreased the saturation a bit and I brightened and sharpened her eyes just a little.

All in all, not very much change. How do you like this version?

Richard, thanks for working with this! I like the crop, though I will look back at my original and see if I can get both flowers... Also, the eyes look better. I hope to post a revised version within a day or two... Thanks again for commenting!

[JamesScott86]

That is beautiful! Excellent Shot!!!

[klpurkett]

That is beautiful! Excellent Shot!!!

Thanks

[klpurkett]

Finally had a chance to rework this a bit. Any better? Thanks for the input! Kristy

[William W]

Finally had a chance to rework this a bit. Any better? Thanks for the input!

It's good that the two flowers are in the frame and I think that the Square Crop looks very good.

Are you using a Calibrated Monitor?

Can you see that your redo is a bit darker than the original image that you posted and also a lot darker than the redo which Richard posted?

Also, this redo has a Green cast. Can you see that green in her hair and also in her skin?

Here is an indicative of a correct skin tone and the correct exposure of it, for a young, fair skinned, non-tanned Caucasian Child. The original is on the left:



WW

[klpurkett]

It's good that the two flowers are in the frame and I think that the Square Crop looks very good.

Are you using a Calibrated Monitor?

Can you see that your redo is a bit darker than the original image that you posted and also a lot darker than the redo which Richard posted?

Also, this redo has a Green cast. Can you see that green in her hair and also in her skin?

Here is an indicative of a correct skin tone and the correct exposure of it, for a young, fair skinned, non-tanned Caucasian Child. The original is on the left:



WW

Thank you for your comments, Bill. Much appreciated! I am using a laptop, though I have gone through the calibration on it a couple times. I'm confident that I do not have a very accurate screen to work with at this point. However, yes, I do realize my second edit is darker than the first, and now that you point out the green hue, I can see that as well. I suppose today as I was working on it I felt (for whatever reason) that the original was too washed out, and my eyes preferred the warmer look. Or... Now that I'm looking at my screen brightness settings... It looks as though someone turned up the brightness since I first worked this image. That is surely part of the problem, too. I will be more aware of this in the future! Thanks for posting this comparison... She is quite tanned, having spent a good deal of time in the sun this summer, but perhaps a skin tone in between the two versions would be most accurate. I'll need to keep working on my exposures and white balance to get these things right in the camera!

[William W]

. . . I am using a laptop, though I have gone through the calibration on it a couple times. I'm confident that I do not have a very accurate screen to work with at this point. . . etc . .. It looks as though someone turned up the brightness since I first worked this image. That is surely part of the problem, too

The ambient light in the room in which you are working can mess up your interpretation of the screen’s image. And changing the screen brightness does too!

*

She is quite tanned, having spent a good deal of time in the sun this summer, but perhaps a skin tone in between the two versions would be most accurate. I'll need to keep working on my exposures and white balance to get these things right in the camera

“Warm” and “Cool” are related to but are different from ‘the correct exposure for skin tone’

Here is a cooler version (on the left) and a warmer version (on the right).
The ‘indicative correct exposure for skin tones’ is in the middle:



WW

[Cantab]

The ambient light in the room in which you are working can mess up your interpretation of the screen’s image. And changing the screen brightness does too!

*



“Warm” and “Cool” are related to but are different from ‘the correct exposure for skin tone’

Here is a cooler version (on the left) and a warmer version (on the right).
The ‘indicative correct exposure for skin tones’ is in the middle:



WW

Bill, when you refer to "indicative correct exposure for skin tone" are you refering to an analysis of the R, G and B numbers for the skin? The reason I ask is that several weeks ago I read on the internet a process for obtaining a good skin tone when doing pp. The process involved the RGB numbers as well as some arithmetic in setting the "correct" numbers. I tried it on one image and it seemed to work.

[William W]

Great question.

Yes - a very good technique to know.

*

. . . "indicative correct exposure for skin tone" are you referring to an analysis of the R, G and B numbers for the skin?

when I wrote that and for what I do - Not really. Not usually.

Mainly I use: My eye; Calibrated Monitor; Calibrated Working Environment (i.e. a dedicated editing room) and my experience.

*

The reason I ask is that several weeks ago I read on the internet a process for obtaining a good skin tone when doing pp. The process involved the RGB numbers as well as some arithmetic in setting the "correct" numbers. I tried it on one image and it seemed to work.

Yes. I understand. A very good technique to know about and to use.

With the Little Girl above, I did used the RGB readout for a COMPARATIVE between the Forehead and the (red part) of the cheek, just to check that I was not overdoing the cheek (too much red) or underplaying the forehead (too much blue)

I also sometimes use the CMY numbers.

With colour printing (enlarger) we would ‘dial in’ the Colour Correction, so I am used to using the figures as a COMPARATIVE to the TEST STRIP, but would run the test strip first by eye and experience.

My advice is to use the numbers, and the suggested ‘arithmetic "correct" numbers’ to get the experience so that you get your eye finely tuned. Then use the tools when necessary to confirm your brain’s conclusions or as a guide.

I don’t encourage ‘photography by formulae’: as an example I don’t use the histogram very often. But I agree that it is a REALLY GOOD tool to use when it is needed to be used.

So therefore I always encourage others not to chimp and refer to the Histogram after each shot as a matter of course: it is way WAY better to learn how to get the exposure correct the first go, by learning how the Camera’s TTL Meter works and how best to use it.

WW