I too thought the image was overexposed when I first saw it but decided
that the problem was my yet uncalibrated monitor. I turned down the
brightness and (especially) contrast and she looked much better. And
that was the basis of my compliment to Ken. Since I can't trust the
monitor yet I copied the image into PhotoShop and computed a "face
histogram" (levels command run against just the face and some hair as a
selection). That clearly shows that the face is too bright and that
you're correct in reducing the brightness there. Your rework, however,
appears to have accentuated the red in the lower half of her face which
is not her real skin color but a reflection from her very red dress. I
think that's there only by virtue of the flash and is in need of
softening. But perhaps I should not comment on color further until my
monitor is telling me truth. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 12/2/2011 12:04 AM, Moose wrote:
> On 12/1/2011 6:29 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> In today's installment of the Zone-10 Shameless Plug Alert, we have a photo
>> taken from a portrait session. So what? Everybody takes portraits. Yes, I
>> know. But I thought this one might be of interest for several reasons.
>>
>> http://zone-10.com/cmsm/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=656&Itemid=1
>>
>> The camera used was my E-1 which I've been grousing about getting rid of
>> for like forever. One of these days, I'll finally come to my senses and
>> toss the thing, but in the meantime I'll try to put up with it. As noted in
>> the text, this shot is straight-out-of-camera with only cropping and
>> resizing applied. (sharpening applied after resizing to bring it back to
>> what the original is like). Of course, I will let Millerslab color correct
>> it for me for the final prints.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> The shadowing on the image isn't perfect, but the client is thrilled. If
>> she's happy, I'm happy. :)
>
> OK, I know the fashion in portraits, today even more than in the past, is
> plastic skin with no pores or texture. And the
> client is happy. And maybe Millers fixes it. And whatever other perfectly
> good reasons there undoubtedly are.
>
> BUT - that portrait is overexposed as presented. I may, as often is so, have
> gone too far, but at least this one looks
> like a live human child. The pink cheeks could be toned down further, if
> desired. I don't know how much of that is
> natural and how much flash
> artifact.<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/AG/PB180059-zx.htm>
>
> Parents, child and grandchildren could go back to this version and believe
> that's what she actually looked like, not the
> ghost of her dead twin sister. OK, prose over the top a bit, but I marvel at
> how the professional family portraits of my
> brothers and I from our youth look so unlike real people.
>
> Real Skin Moose
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|