Young Girl C&C welcomed

[KimC]

Hi everyone. I haven't posted much lately as I have been working on improving my skills related to photography and PP of images w/people. I have been experimenting with different PP techniques of late trying to determine what I like best. There is so much to learn, and I think I will always feel like I am not learning fast enough.

Thought I'd share one with you for CC.

ISO 320; 1/500s; f3.5; 105mm

[Digital]

Kim, I like this photo; however I would crop a little off the left hand side.


Bruce

[Shadowman]

Nice effort.

[Manfred M]

The side / back lighting on your subject is giving you a nice hair / rim light on the camera right side and that is working very nicely for this image. You have good fill on the face, given the lighting and I see golden catchlights in her eyes. Were you using a gold coloured reflector as a fill? I'd be tempted to sharpen the eyes and lips a touch too (in-process sharpening). Some of the bright bokeh on the camera left side is a touch distracting and I would tone some of those areas down. I might also clone out the reflections from the ear rings as they add a minor distraction as well.

I might move the white point to the left just a touch too.

I'm not quite sure why you posed your subject straight on. That pose tends to be less flattering (it tends to make the subject look wider than she is). It also makes the dominant eye (the camera left eye) more noticeable. If you had turned your subject a bit so the dominant eye is a bit futher back, this would be less noticeable.

I'm also wondering as to the fairly strict approach to the rule of thirds. Your subject's eye are on one of the thirds lines and another thirds line runs pretty well down the centre of the nose. The rule of thirds does not have to be followed quite that precisely (if at all). I tend to like having the subject's eyes in the upper third, so a bit of a crop there and a bit of a crop on the right will keep the 4 x 5 format and the assymetry of the shot, but will (in my view) give you better balance in the image.

[KimC]

Thanks for commenting Bruce. Yes, I agree cropping a bit on the left is an alternative.

Kim, I like this photo; however I would crop a little off the left hand side.


Bruce

[KimC]

Thanks for commenting John.

Nice effort.

[KimC]

Thanks for commenting Manfred.

I was using a combo gold & silver reflector. I have come not to like the reflectors with any gold as I find it puts gold highlights on portions of the skin no matter how careful I am making the skin look blotchy.... and then difficult to handle in PP.

I have attached a revised edit. I toned down areas that I found too bright on relook, adjusted the reflection on her ear rings, and adjusted the white point by 5%. Question - although my monitor is calibrated, I am still struggling with the brightness of my pictures. Any tips on getting the brightness right during calibration? I do the calibration when the light in the room is neutral and there is no direct light on my monitor.

Were you using a gold coloured reflector as a fill? I'd be tempted to sharpen the eyes and lips a touch too (in-process sharpening). Some of the bright bokeh on the camera left side is a touch distracting and I would tone some of those areas down. I might also clone out the reflections from the ear rings as they add a minor distraction as well.

I might move the white point to the left just a touch too.

Posing is def an area I struggle with and an area I need to improve. Wish I had more subjects to practice on.

I adjusted the crop in my revised version - is that what you were referring to?

I'm not quite sure why you posed your subject straight on. That pose tends to be less flattering (it tends to make the subject look wider than she is). It also makes the dominant eye (the camera left eye) more noticeable. If you had turned your subject a bit so the dominant eye is a bit futher back, this would be less noticeable.

I'm also wondering as to the fairly strict approach to the rule of thirds. Your subject's eye are on one of the thirds lines and another thirds line runs pretty well down the centre of the nose. The rule of thirds does not have to be followed quite that precisely (if at all). I tend to like having the subject's eyes in the upper third, so a bit of a crop there and a bit of a crop on the right will keep the 4 x 5 format and the assymetry of the shot, but will (in my view) give you better balance in the image.

[Manfred M]

Thanks for commenting Manfred.

You're welcome Kim.

I was using a combo gold & silver reflector. I have come not to like the reflectors with any gold as I find it puts gold highlights on portions of the skin no matter how careful I am making the skin look blotchy.... and then difficult to handle in PP.

I rarely use anything other than a white reflector. It works very well by providing a soft, diffuse light that works especially well with women and children. For men, especially when the subject is middle aged or older, I will use a silver reflector. It gives a neutral, but harder light and works well in defining a "more masculine" look. It does well with wrinkles, scars and other "badges of honour" that men tend to like to show off as they mature.

I have shot gold reflectors in some types of photography, but not often enough to be comfortable with it. They are particularly well suited for what is sometimes referred to as the "beach bunny" or "California girl" look; i.e. glamour type work where the photographer is trying to accent a particular lifestyle. I find I need to be shooting on the warm side of neutral to have a gold reflector work well. It does produce a fairly hard light, just like a silver reflector. I have not used a gold / silver, but suspect the light will be fairly hard, but with a more muted "glow".

For this shot I would have gone with a white reflector, positioned as close to the subject as possible.

I have attached a revised edit. I toned down areas that I found too bright on relook, adjusted the reflection on her ear rings, and adjusted the white point by 5%. Question - although my monitor is calibrated, I am still struggling with the brightness of my pictures. Any tips on getting the brightness right during calibration? I do the calibration when the light in the room is neutral and there is no direct light on my monitor.

Kim - which screen are you using and tool are you using to calibrate?

There are two key things to pay attention to when setting up your work area; the first is getting the calibration right and that means having the screen set to between 80 and 120 candela / square meter (a.k.a. "nits", if you see that term used). Most screens are set up far too bright and "out of the box" they are often in the 200 - 600 candela / square meter range. This is fine for watching movies or working in an office environment, but not for photo editing. My calibration software lets me set the brightness level when I run it. I have set my screen to 100 candela / square meter; I know a number of site members that are running their screens at 120 candela / square meter.

The second issue is room brightness. If you are working in a room that is too bright, the ambient light reduces contrast. To understand that effect, look at your cell phone screen in a dimly lit room, a normally lit room and outside in bright sunlight. Look at how contrasty the room is in the dimly lit room and how low it is in bright sunlight. The same principle applies to the screen you are using to edit your images.

Normally the recommended room brightness is having a light level below 70 lux. I happen to work in an area where the light level is 40 lux. My handheld light meter (Sekonic L-358) comes with a conversion table so I can easily measure the light level in my workspace. As I work in a basement office, I have virtually the same level of lighting throughout the day.

Posing is def an area I struggle with and an area I need to improve. Wish I had more subjects to practice on.

I think that is a problem for all of us. One thing that you might want to consider is seeing if there is a photography meetup group near where you live ( https://www.meetup.com ). I have connected with one here earlier this year and have had the opportunity to shoot a number of professional models at a relatively reasonable cost. I've also joined a local camera club and their studio photography group does this too (again at reasonable cost), but I have not looked into this at all yet.

I adjusted the crop in my revised version - is that what you were referring to?

Yes; just compare your version to my version and that should give you an idea of where I was coming from. I think we are closely aligned on your most recent image.

[KimC]

Yes, learned my lesson - only using white for the most part now.

I rarely use anything other than a white reflector.

I have an iMac 21 inch and I calibrate with a Spyder5Pro. I do think my brightness was set within the variables you mention, but will recheck with another calibration. I work in my living room. My monitor faces the wall, and to my left there is a full wall of windows. As a result, unless I am working at night, I don't use a light. The sun never shines on my monitor.

Kim - which screen are you using and tool are you using to calibrate?

There are two key things to pay attention to when setting up your work area; the first is getting the calibration right and that means having the screen set to between 80 and 120 candela / square meter (a.k.a. "nits", if you see that term used). Most screens are set up far too bright and "out of the box" they are often in the 200 - 600 candela / square meter range. This is fine for watching movies or working in an office environment, but not for photo editing. My calibration software lets me set the brightness level when I run it. I have set my screen to 100 candela / square meter; I know a number of site members that are running their screens at 120 candela / square meter.

The second issue is room brightness. If you are working in a room that is too bright, the ambient light reduces contrast. To understand that effect, look at your cell phone screen in a dimly lit room, a normally lit room and outside in bright sunlight. Look at how contrasty the room is in the dimly lit room and how low it is in bright sunlight. The same principle applies to the screen you are using to edit your images.

Normally the recommended room brightness is having a light level below 70 lux. I happen to work in an area where the light level is 40 lux. My handheld light meter (Sekonic L-358) comes with a conversion table so I can easily measure the light level in my workspace. As I work in a basement office, I have virtually the same level of lighting throughout the day.

Yes, thanks for the suggestion. I have looked around and most do landscapes and not people. Need to dig a little deeper into the groups.

I think that is a problem for all of us. One thing that you might want to consider is seeing if there is a photography meetup group near where you live ( https://www.meetup.com ). I have connected with one here earlier this year and have had the opportunity to shoot a number of professional models at a relatively reasonable cost. I've also joined a local camera club and their studio photography group does this too (again at reasonable cost), but I have not looked into this at all yet.

Yes, I see that now. I forgot to mention that I sharpened the eyes; your image seems a little more overall sharp, but otherwise very similar now.

Yes; just compare your version to my version and that should give you an idea of where I was coming from. I think we are closely aligned on your most recent image.

[Manfred M]

The iMac has a good quality sRGB screen and the Spyder 5 is a good, modern calibration / profiling tool. I don't know any of the DataColor equipment, other than through what I have heard from others. It should do the job for you and I believe it will support setting the appropriate brightness on your screen.

Your setup, on the other hand is not ideal for image editing. Sitting beside a window means that there is a lot of light coming in during daylight hours, even when it is overcast and the intensity of the light will be quite variable, depending on the time of day and outside conditions, which means every time you look at your screen, you will be seeing something a bit different in terms of contrast and colours. It doesn't matter that the screen is not being hit by direct sunlight. I suspect running your screen in the 80 - 120 nit range will make it look quite dark and dull.