Pushkar Girl #1 - C&C Welcome

[fotugraphy]

Hi, going forward on my photography venture I stopped and clicked another shot. Can you please review it and let me know what exactly is missing for it to make it much better?

Recently i have visited Pushkar, Rajasthan, India (Camel Fair). Met this gal, she is 12 years old and had beautiful green sparkling eyes, I shot many pics of her. Will be posting full series very soon. I wanted to emphasize more on the eyes. I have used Natural Light here and deliberately under exposed it. In the post processing I have Slightly enhanced her crystal clear eyes and fixed minor skin tones.

Please provide your views and suggestion with composition, frame, crops and processing.

Thank You

PS : Please click on the image for lightbox screen view (Highly recommended)

[Shadowman]

Very striking image, I like it especially the treatment to the eyes.

[fotugraphy]

Very striking image, I like it especially the treatment to the eyes.

thanks for your kind review and appreciation. I did minor changes.. havnt touched the main tonal values of the eyes I used the light to enhance it within the camera Main advantage was that she already got such bright and sparkling eyes.

[Manfred M]

Another interesting image to critique... I remember being in Pushkar at the camel market last November.

1. The image seems to have a red cast to it. Did you do this on purpose or is this the way the image turned out? One of the reasons I ask is that this image is all about the girl's eyes, and having the whites of her eyes looking too pink is a bit distracting. The huge catchlights (and your reflection in them) are quite interesting and are what makes this image.

2. Is there any reason you decided to left the left 1/3 of this image. It adds nothing to the image and while I know some well known head shot photographers (Peter Hurley) have adopted this style, I'm not a great fan of it in this instance. I suspect a square crop might be a better choice here.

3. I might be tempted to crop some of the bottom off in this image. I suspect this image would look better if you cropped slightly into her chin. That would eliminate the little white line that is running into her chin.

4. I know you like it dark, but I would still brighten it up a touch to bring out some more features in her face.

5. I might also do a bit of skin smoothing and touching up with that lighter image. I use the Imagenomics Portrait plugin (quite expensive) for some of my portrait work. I would also add a slight vignette to the image.

6. Something I didn't do in my edit was to remove the red lines in the whites of her eyes. If I were working on the original I would also do some in process sharpening of her eyes and eye lashes and probably a touch of work on her lips as well. I would be very careful on whitening her eyes as these can look unreal and almost spooky if overdone.

[Dave A]

Striking image and I really like Manfred,s edit.

Dave

[John 2]

Striking image and I really like Manfred,s edit.

Dave

+1 from me. Those eyes make the shot.

[Shadowman]

Another interesting image to critique... I remember being in Pushkar at the camel market last November.

1. The image seems to have a red cast to it. Did you do this on purpose or is this the way the image turned out? One of the reasons I ask is that this image is all about the girl's eyes, and having the whites of her eyes looking too pink is a bit distracting. The huge catchlights (and your reflection in them) are quite interesting and are what makes this image.

2. Is there any reason you decided to left the left 1/3 of this image. It adds nothing to the image and while I know some well known head shot photographers (Peter Hurley) have adopted this style, I'm not a great fan of it in this instance. I suspect a square crop might be a better choice here.

3. I might be tempted to crop some of the bottom off in this image. I suspect this image would look better if you cropped slightly into her chin. That would eliminate the little white line that is running into her chin.

4. I know you like it dark, but I would still brighten it up a touch to bring out some more features in her face.

5. I might also do a bit of skin smoothing and touching up with that lighter image. I use the Imagenomics Portrait plugin (quite expensive) for some of my portrait work. I would also add a slight vignette to the image.

6. Something I didn't do in my edit was to remove the red lines in the whites of her eyes. If I were working on the original I would also do some in process sharpening of her eyes and eye lashes and probably a touch of work on her lips as well. I would be very careful on whitening her eyes as these can look unreal and almost spooky if overdone.

The edit while very good tends to glamorize the young lady; I think the original could use some additional editing, yet its presentation expresses an inner innocence.

[Manfred M]

The edit while very good tends to glamorize the young lady; I think the original could use some additional editing, yet its presentation expresses an inner innocence.

John - you make an interesting observation and to some extent, I see your point. While I see the processing I did resulted in more of a portrait look, I'm intrigued at what point the "inner innocence" got lost in the PP work. I virtually always throw out my in-process files when I do a critique on the image, so I had to rebuild my edits from scratch, so the final product will be close, but not an exact match to my original posting. Let me walk through each step I did to see if you can help me see where this transformation took place.

Raj - if you wish me to take down any of my edits. please let me know.


The best way to see the changes from edit to edit is to open the first image in Lightbox and to use the arrows to scroll through each successive change.



Step 0 - This is Raj's original posting. The starting point. I find it is too dark and has a significant warm colour cast.





Step 1 Correct the colour cast





Step 2 - Brighten up the image






Step 3 I find that the first two steps in my edit reintroduced a bit too much warmth into the skin tones, so I desaturated the whole image slightly.





Step 4 I find that the lighting in the image and the impact of the edits really bring out some of the blemishes and skin issues with this subject, so I did a fairly heavy-handed cleanup of moles and other minor skin issues.





Step 5 Use of Imaginomic Portrait plugin to clean up the harsh look of the skin. This plugin does a wonderful job in softening the skin of girls and women. The reason I used it here is that I found that the lighting and edits resulted in skin that is just to textured for someone this young.





Step 6 Crop. As I mentioned in my original post, I find that the image needs a minor crop on the bottom to remove some extraneous materials below the chin and a heavy crop on the left to get rid of the material that does not contribute to the image. When I did my original edit, this was actually one of my first steps.

The net effect of the crop is that the the subject appears to be a lot larger so some of the colour / tone and texture issues really come out when the shot is cropped.






Step 7 In process sharpening, reducing reds in the white part of the eye and cleaning up the lips. This is something I wrote about in my original post, but didn't do to the image. I'm a bit limited to what I wanted to attempt, given the relatively small size / format of the image that Raj posted. Nicely said, it is too easy to get unwanted artifacts at the level I would normally edit the eyes and the lips.




Just for continuity, here is Raj's original, cropped to final edit format.




Thoughts or comments?

[Shadowman]

John - you make an interesting observation and to some extent, I see your point. While I see the processing I did resulted in more of a portrait look, I'm intrigued at what point the "inner innocence" got lost in the PP work. I virtually always throw out my in-process files when I do a critique on the image, so I had to rebuild my edits from scratch, so the final product will be close, but not an exact match to my original posting. Let me walk through each step I did to see if you can help me see where this transformation took place.

Raj - if you wish me to take down any of my edits. please let me know.




Step 0 - This is Raj's original posting. The starting point. I find it is too dark and has a significant warm colour cast.





Step 1 Correct the colour cast





Step 2 - Brighten up the image






Step 3 I find that the first two steps in my edit reintroduced a bit too much warmth into the skin tones, so I desaturated the whole image slightly.





Step 4 I find that the lighting in the image and the impact of the edits really bring out some of the blemishes and skin issues with this subject, so I did a fairly heavy-handed cleanup of moles and other minor skin issues.





Step 5 Use of Imaginomic Portrait plugin to clean up the harsh look of the skin. This plugin does a wonderful job in softening the skin of girls and women. The reason I used it here is that I found that the lighting and edits resulted in skin that is just to textured for someone this young.





Step 6 Crop. As I mentioned in my original post, I find that the image needs a minor crop on the bottom to remove some extraneous materials below the chin and a heavy crop on the left to get rid of the material that does not contribute to the image. When I did my original edit, this was actually one of my first steps.

The net effect of the crop is that the the subject appears to be a lot larger so some of the colour / tone and texture issues really come out when the shot is cropped.






Step 7 In process sharpening, reducing reds in the white part of the eye and cleaning up the lips. This is something I wrote about in my original post, but didn't do to the image. I'm a bit limited to what I wanted to attempt, given the relatively small size / format of the image that Raj posted. Nicely said, it is too easy to get unwanted artifacts at the level I would normally edit the eyes and the lips.




Thoughts or comments?

Hi Manfred,

I think steps 4-6 is where the transformation from girl to woman occurred. Removal of the blemishes and softening of the skin created too much of a flawless female, I think some of the moles should have been kept and the softening perhaps lessened. Also, the crop made the mouth more prominent which added a bit of sensuality to her face. I like the edit but her essence is totally different.

[Clactonian]

I think one has to be careful before substantially editing another author's image. Whilst I admire Manfred's skills and the final image, is it what Raj intended? What we the 'critics' see is not necessarily what the photographer envisaged. In this case Raj requested C & C so maybe it is acceptable. Helpful suggestions are always welcome even if we the photographer choose to differ because they do not meet our vision.
Maybe I'm missing the point here but I would still recommend caution. I left this forum the last time because my images were being publicly edited out of all recognition. I don't know it all and learn something new every day from this and other fora but I know what I photographed, why I photographed it and how I would like the image to look even if I didn't quite achieve that aim. Help in achieving that aim is as I say always welcome.
Maybe the onus is on the publisher seeking guidance to clearly state what they are trying achieve when seeking guidance rather than invite a free for all.
I mean no offence to either Raj, Manfred whose skills are consummate , or any other contributor.

[Round Tuit]

John - you make an interesting observation and to some extent, I see your point. While I see the processing I did resulted in more of a portrait look, I'm intrigued at what point the "inner innocence" got lost in the PP work. I virtually always throw out my in-process files when I do a critique on the image, so I had to rebuild my edits from scratch, so the final product will be close, but not an exact match to my original posting. Let me walk through each step I did to see if you can help me see where this transformation took place.
...
Thoughts or comments?

Manfred,
I agree with John's observations. However, I think that the very first step(removing the color cast) started the transformation from a slightly insecure looking child to a colder more calculating woman. Steps 4 to 6 finished the metamorphosis.

Andre

[Manfred M]

I think one has to be careful before substantially editing another author's image. Whilst I admire Manfred's skills and the final image, is it what Raj intended? What we the 'critics' see is not necessarily what the photographer envisaged. In this case Raj requested C & C so maybe it is acceptable. Helpful suggestions are always welcome even if we the photographer choose to differ because they do not meet our vision.
Maybe I'm missing the point here but I would still recommend caution. I left this forum the last time because my images were being publicly edited out of all recognition. I don't know it all and learn something new every day from this and other fora but I know what I photographed, why I photographed it and how I would like the image to look even if I didn't quite achieve that aim. Help in achieving that aim is as I say always welcome.
Maybe the onus is on the publisher seeking guidance to clearly state what they are trying achieve when seeking guidance rather than invite a free for all.
I mean no offence to either Raj, Manfred whose skills are consummate , or any other contributor.

Mike - Agree, with a big BUT.

Can you please review it and let me know what exactly is missing for it to make it much better?

I know Raj and we spent some time together photographing when I was in New Delhi last year. Raj did open this thread with a request for feedback (and I've given him feedback this way a number of times in the past), and when things get too complicated to say in words, I will try to show in pictures.

This is a technique I was exposed to during several advanced photography courses I took at the local community college. The professors would walk through and edit student's work, with input from the class members as well as the student that took the picture. While I certainly understand your concerns, I can't think of any better way of making comments, especially if they are difficult to explain in words.

I also have no issues taking down any edits if the person wants me to do so.

[Manfred M]

Okay - two more versions; final crop but this time with out any skin cleanup and one with moles and skin softening.


1. Moles, blemishes and dry skin not touched. No skin softening




2. Moles, blemishes and dry skin not touched. Overall skin softening




Just to add another comment on the ethics of retouching. This is an extremely interesting topic and one that was discussed in some depth at an advanced Photoshop course I took a few years ago at the local community college. Opinions ranges from no retouching whatsoever at one extreme to trying one's best to make a person look "perfect" at the other extreme.

There was also a discussion of the ethics of makeup versus retouching, when both could achieve virtually identical results in an image. Consensus here seemed to be makeup was usually okay in all cases, but getting the same result in post-processing might be "less okay". Just as an aside, I did take a professional makeup course in order to become a better retoucher, at the suggestion of one of the photography profs.

Frankly, this is an area of photography where it is hard to reach any form of consensus, and I admit I went a bit overboard on the face cleanup side to get this discussion going.

I normally do not touch "permanent" markings on a subject (moles and scars) without talking to the subject first. I've found that men, more so than women, are proud of their scars; almost a "mark of honour". I worked with one subject who had plastic surgery to remove a significant facial marking, but did not want the minor side effects of that surgery removed from the image.

Acne, dry skin and other transitory blemishes are things I remove without hesitation. Signs of aging (wrinkles, crows feet) or cases where the camera exaggerates an imperfection (an example one one my daughters has a mole that looks blazing red in a photo, but not at all in real life), those things are a lot trickier to figure out and I try to feel out the subject on this and the answer varies a lot. If I don't get any direction, I will use my discretion and see what the feedback is when people see the proofs or final image. Most people seem to like the middle ground here, but here are exceptions.

Anyhow, a tricky business, especially when dealing with someone else;s work.

[Shadowman]

Okay - two more versions; final crop but this time with out any skin cleanup and one with moles and skin softening.


1. Moles, blemishes and dry skin not touched. No skin softening




2. Moles, blemishes and dry skin not touched. Overall skin softening




Just to add another comment on the ethics of retouching. This is an extremely interesting topic and one that was discussed in some depth at an advanced Photoshop course I took a few years ago at the local community college. Opinions ranges from no retouching whatsoever at one extreme to trying one's best to make a person look "perfect" at the other extreme.

There was also a discussion of the ethics of makeup versus retouching, when both could achieve virtually identical results in an image. Consensus here seemed to be makeup was usually okay in all cases, but getting the same result in post-processing might be "less okay". Just as an aside, I did take a professional makeup course in order to become a better retoucher, at the suggestion of one of the photography profs.

Frankly, this is an area of photography where it is hard to reach any form of consensus, and I admit I went a bit overboard on the face cleanup side to get this discussion going.

I normally do not touch "permanent" markings on a subject (moles and scars) without talking to the subject first. I've found that men, more so than women, are proud of their scars; almost a "mark of honour". I worked with one subject who had plastic surgery to remove a significant facial marking, but did not want the minor side effects of that surgery removed from the image.

Acne, dry skin and other transitory blemishes are things I remove without hesitation. Signs of aging (wrinkles, crows feet) or cases where the camera exaggerates an imperfection (an example one one my daughters has a mole that looks blazing red in a photo, but not at all in real life), those things are a lot trickier to figure out and I try to feel out the subject on this and the answer varies a lot. If I don't get any direction, I will use my discretion and see what the feedback is when people see the proofs or final image. Most people seem to like the middle ground here, but here are exceptions.

Anyhow, a tricky business, especially when dealing with someone else;s work.

I would say that the first is closest to the essence of the original, however the mouth is still a bit on the sensuous side and if the warmth of the lips were toned down the eyes would regain the feeling of innocence. I like the edits however they convey a totally different symbol of persona.

[Manfred M]

I would say that the first is closest to the essence of the original, however the mouth is still a bit on the sensuous side and if the warmth of the lips were toned down the eyes would regain the feeling of innocence. I like the edits however they convey a totally different symbol of persona.

Thanks John - I wonder if you and Andre are onto something here.

Manfred,
I agree with John's observations. However, I think that the very first step(removing the color cast) started the transformation from a slightly insecure looking child to a colder more calculating woman. Steps 4 to 6 finished the metamorphosis.

Andre

These two images are largely the product of colour correction and exposure correction and of course the crop itself, without some of the other edits. I had thought the crop made the biggest difference because we see everything more close up.

Looking at things, the yellow / red colour cast effectively hides the lips because they are in the same tonal group. When the yellow is downplayed, the lips become more noticeable (decreasing yellow = increasing blue content; decreasing red = increasing cyan). When the underexposure is compensated for, we get the same thing happening; the skin lightens up and the lips and moles and other skin imperfections become even more noticeable. Likewise, the look and expression was there, but hidden away in the darker version of the image.

Here is where things get interesting for me, increasing the exposure means a wider tonal range in the skin which becomes more textured. This is not something normally associated with a young female's skin. When I softened that, in an attempt to get younger looking skin, it ended up producing more of a glamour look.

It would be interesting to see Raj's original image before he did his edits. He does mention he underexposed the image; I suspect it might have been better to expose correctly and then darken up in PP.

I look forward to Raj posting the rest of his series. This has been a very interesting learning experience for me.

[DEAN01]

Raj, I like your original original image.

[Shadowman]

Thanks John - I wonder if you and Andre are onto something here.




These two images are largely the product of colour correction and exposure correction and of course the crop itself, without some of the other edits. I had thought the crop made the biggest difference because we see everything more close up.

Looking at things, the yellow / red colour cast effectively hides the lips because they are in the same tonal group. When the yellow is downplayed, the lips become more noticeable (decreasing yellow = increasing blue content; decreasing red = increasing cyan). When the underexposure is compensated for, we get the same thing happening; the skin lightens up and the lips and moles and other skin imperfections become even more noticeable. Likewise, the look and expression was there, but hidden away in the darker version of the image.

Here is where things get interesting for me, increasing the exposure means a wider tonal range in the skin which becomes more textured. This is not something normally associated with a young female's skin. When I softened that, in an attempt to get younger looking skin, it ended up producing more of a glamour look.

It would be interesting to see Raj's original image before he did his edits. He does mention he underexposed the image; I suspect it might have been better to expose correctly and then darken up in PP.

I look forward to Raj posting the rest of his series. This has been a very interesting learning experience for me.

Interesting for me as well, while I do love to process images with a touch of glamour, I sometimes forget the original reason in capturing the scene; I do a lot of street photography and I am always looking for portraits within a scene, usually when I pull a portrait from a street photography scene I leave the scene as an added element rather than crop.

[RobFellows]

My favourite is by far the original image. It's dark and moody and I think it works really well.

[IzzieK]

I am with Manfred in his editing of the image. I have learned a lot from him from the past and here he really illustrated what he had learned from his advanced courses to us. I am grateful for that. I am sure Tejal will be pleased with the result of his edits and processes that Manfred illustrated here instead of just talkies. That he accompanied his narration and process as he edits and what he did, despite the limited version he has is actually remarkable.

What is bothering me even right from the original image is that for a 12-year, this woman looks more like a woman and that is what came out in Manfred's edit, if you understand what I mean...

[Dave Humphries]

What is bothering me even right from the original image is that for a 12-year, this woman looks more like a woman and that is what came out in Manfred's edit, if you understand what I mean...

I do.

First I should say that (apparently) I am rubbish at guessing people's ages (others tell me I differ from their estimate by as much as a decade), so perhaps I'm not the best person to comment, but here goes anyway ...

I think a lot of this is down to the size of the image as presented and the apparent intimacy conveyed by the closer crop. I suggest that most of us wouldn't be that close to a 12 year old, unless perhaps our own children, when familial emotions over-rule all others. I think it is psychological and based on our personal experiences, so I guess dentists and doctors; people who are used to literally being so close to people of this age, might have a different viewpoint, but that's mine.

With this image, she appears* to be wearing lipstick, which adds to the illusion of 'age beyond her years' when combined with the tighter crop.
* although I may be being fooled by a combination of a slightly damper lower lip and her native/natural skin colouring, which I am not familiar with. I don't find the change of WB affects my judgement of her age.

I suspect that subconsciously we judge kid's ages by their height, general body development, gait, language skills, even teeth - and we cannot see any of those things here - we only have the face. There's just not enough context - and going by the face alone (presented this close) - I agree she looks like a woman. It is knowing she's only 12 that then makes us uncomfortable with that.

I have learned a lot from him from the past and here he really illustrated what he had learned from his advanced courses to us. I am grateful for that. I am sure Tejal will be pleased with the result of his edits and processes that Manfred illustrated here instead of just talkies. That he accompanied his narration and process as he edits and what he did, despite the limited version he has is actually remarkable.

I also find these portrait threads very useful, Manfred sees so much more than I do, the little subtle things that make a difference, I guess if I shot more portraits, I'd eventually get there too.


Going back to the original post; Raj mentioned her green eyes - I have to say I really don't see those here, I think they are masked by the WB and catch-light contrast.