Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: performer

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    383
    Real Name
    Catherine

    performer

    Any comments please? I know that the left side of the face looks hot but I was going for a look of a performer with spotlights. When I print it doesn't look too hot (at least, not to me).

    performer

  2. #2
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    22,145
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: performer

    It's a nice image Catherine, but you will get criticized for a number of things happening in the shot:

    1. Yes, the camera right side of the face is too hot. This means that you have lost texture there and that is generally not desirable. Losing them on the shadow side is less of an issue. It looks like the front of the shirt has the same issue.;

    2. The camera left hand is soft and out out focus to the point where it has become a distraction. This is a depth of field issue;

    3. The camera right hand is strange looking and very soft and not well lit to the point that it looks like it is not attached to the body and is definitely a distraction as well; and

    4. The starburst, especially the one that is at the top right edge is distracting.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    383
    Real Name
    Catherine

    Re: performer

    Quote Originally Posted by Manfred M View Post
    It's a nice image Catherine, but you will get criticized for a number of things happening in the shot:

    1. Yes, the camera right side of the face is too hot. This means that you have lost texture there and that is generally not desirable. Losing them on the shadow side is less of an issue. It looks like the front of the shirt has the same issue.;

    2. The camera left hand is soft and out out focus to the point where it has become a distraction. This is a depth of field issue;

    3. The camera right hand is strange looking and very soft and not well lit to the point that it looks like it is not attached to the body and is definitely a distraction as well; and

    4. The starburst, especially the one that is at the top right edge is distracting.
    Thank you very much Manfred. I can do something about points 1 (I have detail in the highlights it was during processing that I lost them) and 4, but those hands are troublesome. I tried adding some motion blur to see if that would help reasoning that maybe the mind would accept blurred hands if it seemed that there was movement in the subject. The back hand is strange looking and I tried different approaches to fix it but none were successful.

    I will think a bit more about what I can do. Not quite willing to give up on it yet. I really appreciate getting your input!

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,956
    Real Name
    Ted

    Re: performer

    Quote Originally Posted by CatherineA View Post
    ... (I have detail in the highlights it was during processing that I lost them) ...
    Glad to hear that, Cath, because selecting the facial highlights (a simple rectangle) in the GIMP shows a very narrow peak in the selection histogram which does indicate a lack of texture, i.e. low local contrast.

    I tried various fancy algorithms to fix that and also just plain curves but nothing helped enough to be worth posting, grump.

    Re-processing based on comments might be a good idea - the composition is certainly worth it!
    Last edited by xpatUSA; 26th September 2021 at 11:36 PM.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,956
    Real Name
    Ted

    Re: performer

    Meanwhile, at 80+, I found the kid's smooth skin quite irritating.

    So I made a highlights mask and added some "missing" texture which seemed to help a bit:

    performer

    Based on the original sepia toning, all I did was add some film grain in the high tones. It seems to help with that shiny low-contrast look ...
    Last edited by xpatUSA; 27th September 2021 at 12:26 AM.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    383
    Real Name
    Catherine

    Re: performer

    Quote Originally Posted by xpatUSA View Post
    Glad to hear that, Cath, because selecting the facial highlights (a simple rectangle) in the GIMP shows a very narrow peak in the selection histogram which does indicate a lack of texture, i.e. low local contrast.

    I tried various fancy algorithms to fix that and also just plain curves but nothing helped enough to be worth posting, grump.

    Re-processing based on comments might be a good idea - the composition is certainly worth it!
    Thanks very much Ted! Yes, I just checked again and all the digital info is there in the original. I am more systematic now when I edit than when I worked on this photo a few months ago, so I don’t know for sure anymore all the steps I took and in what order, but I think the problem arose when I played in Boris Optics to add the lights. I should have just imported a layer of the lights into PS but instead I imported a flattened image. It’s those darn hands that cause me grief but I’ve got a few more ideas.


    Thanks for commenting and trying to help out! Maybe I should post the originals when I post photos here. Or maybe I should include the metadata. I didn’t know if that would be helpful.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,956
    Real Name
    Ted

    Re: performer

    Quote Originally Posted by CatherineA View Post
    Maybe I should post the originals when I post photos here. Or maybe I should include the metadata. I didn’t know if that would be helpful.
    By originals, what do you mean, Cath? Like, you can't post raws here ...

    ... but metadata is always helpful for analysis purposes.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    383
    Real Name
    Catherine

    Re: performer

    Quote Originally Posted by xpatUSA View Post
    Glad to hear that, Cath, because selecting the facial highlights (a simple rectangle) in the GIMP shows a very narrow peak in the selection histogram which does indicate a lack of texture, i.e. low local contrast.

    I tried various fancy algorithms to fix that and also just plain curves but nothing helped enough to be worth posting, grump.

    Re-processing based on comments might be a good idea - the composition is certainly worth it!
    Thanks very much Ted! Yes, I just checked again and all the digital info is there in the original. I am more systematic now when I edit than when I worked on this photo a few months ago, so I don’t know for sure anymore all the steps I took and in what order, but I think the problem arose when I played in Boris Optics to add the lights. I should have just imported a layer of the lights into PS but instead I imported a flattened image. It’s those darn hands that cause me grief but I’ve got a few more ideas.


    Thanks for commenting and trying to help out! Maybe I should post the originals when I post photos here. Or maybe I should include the metadata. I didn’t know if that would be helpful.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    383
    Real Name
    Catherine

    Re: performer

    Thanks again Ted! I didn’t see this second post of yours when I replied before. I really like what you did and I appreciate that you set out your method!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •