First attempt at a portrait

[jkshyt]

My first attempt at a portrait. Please feel free to lend CC.

_A743404-Edit by jk Sullivan, on Flickr

[Geoff F]

Manfred, and a few others, are the portrait experts. But initially, my thoughts would be. Is there a slight blue tint to this scene? Could you get away with a tiny bit of extra highlights carefully applied?

There is some hair, from another person on the left side, which isn't ideal for a portrait; but sometimes all you can do is an attempt to isolate one person from a group so unless this was a posed portrait shot, don't worry too much about that issue.

But, working in the real world, this is quite acceptable for a first portrait attempt. Portraits, weddings and babies are subjects which I try to avoid. Wildlife always seems so much easier.

[rpcrowe]

I softened the skin just a bit working on the neck especially. Reducing the shadows helped smooth the face overall but did not result in a porcelain look. I also tried to neutralize the overall color and did a quickie job with the clone stamp tool to remove a portion of another person's hair at image left.



If I took more time with the portrait - I am sure that the result might be a bit better. Some of the tools that I used were the NIK suite (Viveza for control points and Color Effects Pro for dynamic skin softener) and Photoshop Camera Raw Filter along with Photoshop Clone Stamp Tool.

[xpatUSA]

Jack, may I ask if your intention was to portray a kind of verism in this image but without exaggeration, i.e. just as-is, warts and all.

Noticeable in Richard's edit is the rather enthusiastic toning down of all micro-detail ...

[pschlute]

My thoughts are what has been said already. White balance looks too cold. Someone else's hair in left of frame. Flat lighting and over sharpened image.

Not working for me as a portrait I am afraid, sorry.

I think Richard's edit is an improvement.

[xpatUSA]

My thoughts are what has been said already. White balance looks too cold. Someone else's hair in left of frame. Flat lighting and over sharpened image.

Peter, after downloading and viewing the OP at 100 percent zoom and more, I wasn't able to see any over-sharpening i.e. jaggies, halos, etc.

[pschlute]

Peter, after downloading and viewing the OP at 100 percent zoom and more, I wasn't able to see any over-sharpening i.e. jaggies, halos, etc.

Well for my taste the image is too sharp, whether as a result of pp or not. When taking portraits, often less is more.

Just my view as an observer, human portraiture is not my area of expertise.

[escape]

I look at the image as a street portrait. Because of that, I think the goal of processing is to honestly represent the subject as shot wrinkles and all. Not to make them more pronounced or less. Looking at her I don't think she would want anything less.

[DanK]

The cropping is very tight, but given the person on the left (you might try cloning out that hair), there isn't anything to be done about this.

I think there is a lot one could to do help this image. First, I agree that it is far too cold. I did a rough white balance adjustment by putting the ACT eyedropper on the whites of one eye. I'd probably warm it up more.

Then I would work on tonality with some dodging and burning. The bottom two thids of the face is somewhat in shadow, while there is bright light elsewhere. I would burn in a vignette, particularly at the top, and burn the top of the hair more.

I'd then dodge the bottom two thirds of the face a bit.

Finally, I'd add a modest amount of midtone contrast to the face.

This is a very rough edit, but it shows the directions I was thinking of. I did nothing to the texture of the face.

[xpatUSA]

Well for my taste the image is too sharp, whether as a result of pp or not.

OK, I was only talking edge sharpness or dare I say "resolution", sorry.

I must agree that the micro (or detail or local) contrast is a little high.

When taking portraits, often less is more.

Can't argue with that lore.

Just my view as an observer, human portraiture is not my area of expertise.

Nor mine.

[Manfred M]

Sorry, I haven't been around for a few days and just had a look here.

One defining characteristic of a portrait is that the photographer engages and directs his or her subject. While this has some of the characteristics of a head shot, the engagement / direction is not obvious. I would have asked the subject to step away a bit to help isolate her from the other people she is standing beside.

In terms of colour, I tend to go slightly warmer than neutral when I photograph people when it comes to colour.

I will also consult with the subject regarding retouching for anything other than removing small temporary blemishes like dry skin or pimples. Some people are happy to shed wrinkles or some weight. Others view these features (including blemishes, moles and scars) as "badges of honour". The only time I will break this rule is if I am shooting for a third party who has "hired" the models; in that case, this client dictates the retouching.

[jkshyt]

Thank you all for the insightful comments. I have a much better understanding of what makes a successful portrait.
Below is a original image with no edits from raw to jpeg. 3 generations of woman captured in the park.
Please feel free to make any edits to the image as you see that would show the best outcome.
Thanks!
_A743404 by jk Sullivan, on Flickr

[jkshyt]

My thoughts are what has been said already. White balance looks too cold. Someone else's hair in left of frame. Flat lighting and over sharpened image.

Not working for me as a portrait I am afraid, sorry.

I think Richard's edit is an improvement.

White balance is definitely off, in camera auto.
Thank you for contributing.
I have more work to do!

[jkshyt]

Sorry, I haven't been around for a few days and just had a look here.

One defining characteristic of a portrait is that the photographer engages and directs his or her subject. While this has some of the characteristics of a head shot, the engagement / direction is not obvious. I would have asked the subject to step away a bit to help isolate her from the other people she is standing beside.

In terms of colour, I tend to go slightly warmer than neutral when I photograph people when it comes to colour.

I will also consult with the subject regarding retouching for anything other than removing small temporary blemishes like dry skin or pimples. Some people are happy to shed wrinkles or some weight. Others view these features (including blemishes, moles and scars) as "badges of honour". The only time I will break this rule is if I am shooting for a third party who has "hired" the models; in that case, this client dictates the retouching.

Thank you Manfred! This is a tough subject for me. I'm completely outside my comfort zone, But, I have some good direction now.

[xpatUSA]

White balance is definitely off, in camera auto.

Jack, it is often said that AWB can be fooled quite easily - especially the simple "gray world" method.

In your case and seeing the group and their surrounds, the significant size of areas of green and reddish flesh tones could easily have caused the blue cast.

Not telling you what not to do but I never use Auto White Balance for serious work.

OK for snaps with my Lumix G9 and LX1 though ...

[DanK]

Not telling you what not to do but I never use Auto White Balance for serious work.

If you shoot raw, there is no harm in using AWB because it has no effect on the stored data. What matters is that you have something in the image you can use to set WB in post. In a posed shot, the safest is to do a second shot where someone holds a neutral card like a whiBal. Otherwise, you can do it to taste. In this case, I blew the image up and used the whites of her eyes. That came close, but it was still a bit too cold for my taste.

[Manfred M]

Jack, it is often said that AWB can be fooled quite easily - especially the simple "gray world" method.

In your case and seeing the group and their surrounds, the significant size of areas of green and reddish flesh tones could easily have caused the blue cast.

Not telling you what not to do but I never use Auto White Balance for serious work.

OK for snaps with my Lumix G9 and LX1 though ...

I agree that AWB can be fooled, but with portraits, even when it gets it "right", neutral skin tends to be less attractive than a slight warm direction, in my view.

The slightly warm is up for debate as well as some photographers will add a slight red bias, others a slight yellow, other a slight magenta and others a slight orange. When I say slight, I tend to look at the +5 as my usual go to point, but have gone as high as +10 (out of 256 values).

[Geoff F]

AWB is fine to use if you are shooting Raw, Jack, because it is so easy to change with your Raw conversion. Most of the time it will get you fairly close to the desired level so just a slight tweak will produce perfect results. But if I am shooting under extreme conditions I will do a Custom White Balance, as other people have already mentioned.

Your latest image is a difficult scene. It is rather dark but there are potential problems with the white clothing and background sky which are on the point of over exposure. In which case, I would add some brightness using Curves but reduce that adjustment with masking on the white areas.

[xpatUSA]

So Jack,

Bearing in mind recent advice, did you shoot raw for that group shot?

[jkshyt]

So Jack,

Bearing in mind recent advice, did you shoot raw for that group shot?

Actually, yes I always shoot raw and convert to jpeg. I should probably learn to convert to TIFF.